81–90 of 138 posts
I like the implication that it'd be ok if she wasn't an American citizen.
I am starting to wonder if perhaps there is something wrong with me, for I am not outraged as everyone else seems to be. So long as there's no groping etc going on, I'm inclined to just shrug and say to the agent, "well, you gotta do what you gotta do". I am sorry HN, but I find myself lacking the desire to board this bandwagon.
Except they don't. This procedure is not remotely effective, it serves no purpose except to shame people into using the naked scanner (and indeed, this appears to be the point, since the "pat down" takes place in plain view of everyone). This is why you should be outraged. This is pure thuggery.
For all the understandable outrage, this seems like a genie that will be very hard to put back in the bottle. What politician is going to risk canning a security protocol when there's a not-unreasonable chance of a civilian airplane being blown up in the next few years? Who wants to be the politician that has to explain, after several hundred people died, why they canned any device or protocol which may have helped s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We ought not to call these incidents sexual assault. It sounds too much like hyperbole. I fully agree: these people should talk to someone who has actually been sexually assaulted. That would probably knock some sense into them as to the difference between their experience and actual sexual assault. Being thoroughly frisked, in public, in broad light, where nothing bad could possibly happen, is being compared to bein…
This is a pretty sick response and all too common. If you did not consent to be being touched in a certain way by another human being, no matter the circumstance, they have no right to do so. That is an assault on your person. She was not informed that this person was going to do the things they did to her. She was molested in public by a figure in a position of (supposed) authority. I cannot imagine what she must fe…
that you would dismiss this as "not a real crime"
"Enhanced pat-down," is a shockingly sick euphemism for
"molestation policy."
The problem is not that people are being touched in inappropriate ways. The problem is not that people are being touched in inappropriate ways without them being told about it upfront. The problem is that the legislation to allow this touching was passed in the first place, that the regulations depending on that regulation were put in place and that people actually seems to think this does anything to remove any threat. That is the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>but there are many circumstances in life where we must suffer the same indignities which are not considered assault. A visit to the doctor for example. This analogy makes very little sense. The doctor cannot stop me from visiting a different doctor (who may not insist on the same tests) and the doctor cannot compel me to cancel a trip across the Atlantic if I refuse to submit to the tests. The government can. The d…
"The doctor cannot compel me to cancel a trip across the Atlantic if I refuse to submit to the tests" I'd suggest that failing to discover a fatal disease would be slightly worse than failing to travel somewhere. What you mean to say is that it's OK for a doctor to do it because in that case the recipient believes he is doing it for a good reason. If everyone going through an airport fully believed that these checks…
That's not the point. The point is choice. If I don't like one doctor, I can go to another. If I live in the USA and don't like the TSA, I'm fucked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The doctor cannot compel me to cancel a trip across the Atlantic if I refuse to submit to the tests" I'd suggest that failing to discover a fatal disease would be slightly worse than failing to travel somewhere. What you mean to say is that it's OK for a doctor to do it because in that case the recipient believes he is doing it for a good reason. If everyone going through an airport fully believed that these checks…
> I'd suggest that failing to discover a fatal disease would be slightly worse than failing to travel somewhere. That's not the point. The point is choice. If I don't like one doctor, I can go to another. If I live in the USA and don't like the TSA, I'm fucked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does a visit to the gynecologist count as sexual assault. Of course not, but why? Because, implicitly or explicitly, the patient has consented to being examined. Do you have a particular difficulty with grasping 'consent' in the context the author narrates? edit to clarify: Of course, as far as the law is concerned, there are other factors that constitute "sexual assault" as an offense, but those can't be accurately…
> Does a visit to the gynecologist count as sexual assault. Of course not, but why? Because, implicitly or explicitly, the patient has consented to being examined. In accordance with a medically necessitated test. If a gynecologist is sticking a finger in a womans vagina, whether s/he has implicit or explicit consent is sexual assault if performed under misinformation. If a doctor gropes my testicles or sticks a fing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does a visit to the gynecologist count as sexual assault. Of course not, but why? Because, implicitly or explicitly, the patient has consented to being examined. In accordance with a medically necessitated test. If a gynecologist is sticking a finger in a womans vagina, whether s/he has implicit or explicit consent is sexual assault if performed under misinformation. If a doctor gropes my testicles or sticks a fing…
We're hackers here. Are we convinced someone dedicated could not hide something as deadly as a box cutter in a body cavity? So without the cavity search, this is just security theater.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>but there are many circumstances in life where we must suffer the same indignities which are not considered assault. A visit to the doctor for example. This analogy makes very little sense. The doctor cannot stop me from visiting a different doctor (who may not insist on the same tests) and the doctor cannot compel me to cancel a trip across the Atlantic if I refuse to submit to the tests. The government can. The d…
Maybe the following example is better (maybe I'm arguing more 'state of mind' than the point the OP's post was trying to make, I'm not 100% sure). Let's say a doctor performs an examination of the genitalia on a patient, without medical necessity. Let's say she does it without sexual intent, for example because she is still in training and wants to practice more on genital examinations (this may not make any medical…
I've been watching these stories trickle by on HN for a few days now wondering if I should say what I'm about to say. I'm going to put up an opinion that I'm quite certain is going to be unpopular. At length, I think the potential karma burn is worth speaking out. If you choose to downvote me, please drop in a reasonable reply as well: We ought not to call these incidents sexual assault. It sounds too much like hyper…
I'd like two things to happen: First for the lady blogger mom to get over it, and second for the TSA to be sharply pulled back from their ever more ridiculous policies which are both ineffective and intrusive. They're incompetent monkeys and we keep giving them more power. Which, unsurprisingly, only makes them more annoying, not more competent.
Firstly, if you consider yourself a "victim" of anything your best recourse is one of reflection, and ultimately one of forgiveness in the knowledge that the perpetrators are more insane than other people. You are not a victim. Something happened to you - it was bad - it can't be changed now - but is it going to ruin the rest of your life? That's for you to decide all alone.
I'll refer you to the Buddhist parable of Two Monks here [http://www.examiner.com/buddhism-in-national/buddhist-parabl...]
You don't forgive in order to make life somehow easier for whoever wronged you - you do it in order to make your own life better.
Second the TSA policies and procedures are a joke. The TSA must be stopped. If it takes people getting outraged or stopping air travel to do this - I am all for it. Publish this story as widely as possible, crack jokes on Leno, etc - I don't think it takes away from actual victims of actual sexual harassment (or worse). Victim-hood is overrated, and I firmly believe that the active approach is the only valid approach to solve trauma. Avoidance of the topic isn't going to solve anything (neither is confrontation BTW - insight is what is needed and what resolves seemingly impossible problems in an instant).
Sorry this is not more coherent. Argh.