By Rob Beschizza at 9:47 am Tue, Dec 28, 2010
i got an enhanced pat down coming out of Detroit airport. the TSA agents were totally nice about it. The screener was like, can you walk through the new scanner? and I said I would like to opt out, and he goes Sure ya can! (in the sunniest way possible) and the pat down itself was totally forgettable. While I agree that the forces behind the institutionalization of the scanners, and the scanners themselves is corrupt and dangerous, everyone getting up in arms about having their crotch grazed by another person’s hand has problems with personal space and I think is just homophobic or looking for attention. The comparison to prostitution is really taking the joke too far.
As someone who has worked for a rape and sexual abuse hotline, one of the major things that is important for recovery is survivors regaining control over their own body, which strongly includes control over who touches intimate areas. What the TSA is doing with the pat-downs has the potential to re-traumatize rape and sexual abuse survivors, as well as delay their recovery. There are more rape and sexual abuse survivors out there than you know–obviously there are problems with statistics because people don’t answer truthfully in response to surveys and very few rapes and sexual assaults are reported to the police, but the some stats indicate that an American is sexually assaulted every two minutes.
Different people have different ideas of what “personal space” is. I’m pretty comfortable with people in my personal space. I’m pretty comfortable having anonymous bisexual group sex. That’s a pretty personal space. So if we go by my definition of personal space, everyone would have a cavity search. I doubt most people, likely to include you, would not enjoy that and call it a violation of personal space. Does that mean them (and you) have “problems with personal space”?
The issue is that there are in fact more modest people out there. There needs to be a consensus made, not randomly enforced from someone’s personal opinion.
I agree, as loong as you don’t have to pay extra for the pat down
Holy crap! Someone had something nice to say about Detroit!
Seriously, stop mishearing an earnest argument about unreasonable search as whining about unreasonable inconvenience.
We complain about unreasonable search, the slope is slippery, and you would be glad for our company if the TSA actions ever DO cross your threshold of what’s worth caring about, Pierre.
…everyone getting up in arms about having their crotch grazed by another person’s hand has problems with personal space and I think is just homophobic or looking for attention.
You’re missing the point. It’s not a matter of having a problem with personal space, being homophobic, or being a drama queen. I object to the government requiring me to either submit to a what amounts to letting someone look at my naked body or submit to a patdown (that’s probably more physically intrusive than the ones cops give) in order to get on a plane.
Now if a talented TSA worker wanted to ensure I didn’t have any weapons by taking me to bed and fucking the hell out of me before my flight, I might have fewer objections.
Link above is broken, so I fixed it as well:
pretty sure this is supposed to be more funny than anything else…
no is claiming TSA agents are like prostitutes
Of course not: People WANT the service that prostitutes offer.
“The comparison to prostitution is really taking the joke too far.”
Not at all, if you like they’ll even put you in handcuffs! Know how much it costs to get a hooker to do that?
There should be another part to this venn diagram:
Why they touch your junk-
1) To give you pleasure
2) To check your health
3) To violate your rights
I’ll let the readers figure out which belongs to which group.
This reminds me of this (satire) posting. http://www.theladiesmonthly.com/2010/11/ladies_capitalizing_on_tsa/
Too bad the Venn diagram is incorrect. The set of people who get paid to touch your junk is the union of the three subsets, not the intersection.
Shouldn’t all of the intersections be unions, or at least not intersections? For example, not all prostitutes ‘make more per hour than you do all day’, but surely it’s not just the doctor/prostitutes who do.
Speaking of which, it seems to me that all of the intersections in the diagram are very likely to be empty sets.
Yeah, that completely derails it for me. The three big circles (sets) need to be labeled
1. Require very little training
2. Make more per hour than you do
3. Wear blue latex gloves
The intersections need to be
1âˆ©3 TSA agents
The intersection of all three sets 1âˆ©2âˆ©3 is empty. “Get paid to touch your junk” is the union of all three sets.
To me, the whole diagram looks like it’s inside-out.
Hands down the most informative thing I’ve seen at work all morning…
“..everyone getting up in arms about having their crotch grazed by another person’s hand has problems with personal space and I think is just homophobic or looking for attention.”
Christ, what an sshl! What about little children? What a nice way to strip them of their rights and dignities before they are even mature enough to defend them. What about when they decide this procedure is necessary to enter a movie theatre or a shopping mall? As long as were safe right? That’s all that matters.
None of those people get paid to touch my junk.
I throw my junk into the wheelie-bin, (except the stuff I can recycle), The city’s refuse-collectors take it away in their truck, and tip it into landfill. So in fact, they don’t need to touch it at all, machines do most of the work.
Oh. I see. Yes, now I see.
You poor people. I understand that you use the word “junk” to describe your genitalia. You think of your genitals as worthless, debris, of no value, to be discarded?
How very sad
In Spanish, it’s pronounced “hunk” – which is more accurate.
“It’s for your safety” is a null argument.
None of the recent attacks originated in the US. Therefore, these harrassments cannot stop them.
If it’s truly for “Safety,” everyone should be stripped, cavity searched, given a paper robe and locked into their seat as on a roller coaster for the duration.
Likewise, all cargo should be Xrayed, magnafluxed, ultrasounded and sniffed.
As the latter two paragraphs are not done, it is not about “Safety.” It’s about the “perception of safety” for morons.
I want to see the set for morons/who believe in “safety”/who are okay being fondled by strangers if they can rationalize it.
Surely there’s a subset of prostitutes who get paid to wear blue latex gloves while touching your junk.
yeah, but that’s them roleplaying either doctor or TSA agent. However, well played sir.
Not to be mean, but try to know how to read a Venn diagram before criticizing its accuracy. Not all doctors are paid more than you, not all prostitutes are poorly trained, and not all TSA agents wear blue gloves. However, there is a subset of each group that ARE paid to touch your junk, and therein lies the intersection of the diagram.
I’m trying to figure out which of the 3 most fits my wife.
Given that I’m straight, if I tell the screener that I’m not, can I request a pat-down from a woman (or minimally a semi-passable transvestite)?
GTA defines prostitutes as desperate people who will have oral sex with total strangers and are allowed to display diseases after their names, like doctors. You know, STD, HIV, etc. Somewhere along the line, diseased sidewalk stewardesses became “call girls” and other upwardly mobile revisionista Kama Suitcase inconveniences.
Remember kiddies, your sophistication may be normative without once approaching normal. I’d still rank whores above TSA agents in the scale of 21st Century values.
The scanners are no more invasive than a physical examination, and you do hear some horror stories about airport security. It depends totally on the staff and usually they’re fine, however I think it’s people against the scanners that are being immature, you’d have no problem undressing for a doctor in the appropriate circumstances and this is for your safety. They’re optional, some people prefer them to being touched and they should have the option to say “yes” just as you can say “no”, so actually I’d say they’re a rather good thing
I’m pretty sure that the collection of prostitutes with MDs that work for the TSA is an empty set. But you never know….
FYI – Chartporn didn’t create that chart; I’m not sure who the original artist was.
The intersection is correct. Some prostitutes don’t touch your junk, and some doctors don’t wear blue latex gloves, etc.
I have issues with this chart:
According to this study http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/apr09/4.aspx Prostitutes make, on average, between 25 and 30 dollars per hour. If that is more than you make per day, then I think you may be being taken advantage of by an unscrupulous employer who is somehow skirting the minimum wage laws. There isn’t much in the world worth doing in exchange for $3.50 an hour. At least not in America.
According to this chart: http://www.payscale.com/research/US/People_with_Doctor_of_Medicine_(MD)_Degrees/Salary doctors make about 140,000 per year which if divided by working days in a year (155) and 8 hours a day comes out to 68.2 dollars per hour. So if that is less than you get per day then you are working a sub $9/hour job. Considering that I got paid $7/hour as an unskilled assistant to a guy who changed lightbulbs when I was 19 back in 1996, I think there are better jobs out there for you.
Fixed, here: http://eblong.com/zarf/thod/38.html
Fun fact: The blue gloves are most likely nitrile, not latex.
Look, Each one of us has their own personal comfort level. To some streaking was fun, to others even getting undressed for Gym was unbearable. i am old enough that I don’t care and having lived a pretty full life I can guarantee there are pics on the internet that would keep me from running for office. Let people discover their own level of comfort but PLEASE hurry up. Others are waiting to have their “junk” touched or… not.
For those against the gov’t
Just want to check with those against getting scanned and/or pat down.
a) Suppose there are no TSA
b) suppose some airlines have scanning , some have pat downs , some have both , and may be some have neither
would you be okay with private companies (airlines in this case)
enforcing their own security?
if so , why would it different if gov’t (i.e. TSA) do it or the airlines themselves?
if not , would airlines be liable for deaths and damages if they find themselves regularly targeted for bombings.
Yes, this is a lot of hypothetical , but I find that understanding the options and alternatives matter. you could say which ever security measure is ineffective , but my line of questioning is independent of individual security measure.
Ummm…you know that prior to 9/11 security at airports _was_ private, right? Not government run. So yeah, I’m pretty sure that most people have no problems with the airlines/airport providing the security.
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Submit a tip
The rules you agree to by using this website.
Who will be eaten first?
Jason Weisberger, Publisher
Ken Snider, Sysadmin