It's Not Trivial

[paft.livejournal.com]

The other day someone asked me, after I’d made some passing comment about the whole TSA get-photographed-naked/be groped issue, why anyone would bother with this when there are so many other more important issues, like world poverty. “Why waste your time talking about something so trivial?” I was asked.

After thinking about it, I decided it’s not a minor issue.

This latest hamhanded policy – and its timing -- amounts to a referendum on how much intrusion officials can inflict on Americans. It’s no accident that this came up not long before the holiday rush. They’re counting on most of us being too preoccupied with getting from point A to point B to complain. After a few weeks, they hope, we’ll get used to it and accept it as the norm.



That’s really what it’s about.

So what’s next? Because rest assured, the envelope will be pushed a little further once they’ve established that we will put up with either being effectively photographed nude or strangers groping our genitals. It always is. Every time such authorities make an incursion into our privacy, it’s with solemn assurances that it will not be abused and – honest to God! – this is as far as they’ll go. Really! Cross their hearts and hope to die!

Don’t for one minute assume that wealthy and influential travelers are going to be subjected to this policy. Once it becomes established, opting out of it will become just one more cozy perk enjoyed by high end business fliers, one more little chip at the dignity of the rest of us.

No, it’s not on quite the same scale as world poverty, the nuclear arms race, unemployment, or torture. But it’s still important. It impacts us all. It forces us to confront how much of our personal privacy we’re willing to relinquish in the name of security.

At what point do we draw the line?

Crossposted from Thoughtcrimes

Comments

[qnetter]

You're not owed replies.

As for this case, a definite misstep, in my opinion -- and I'll own up to my opinion being my opinion, which I don't see much of here.

But there is some oddball magicness I see people apply to being touched on their genitals that they don't apply to their elbow, say, or their shoulder, and I don't get it.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

She surely is not owed responses. But the fact you appear(ed) to be selecting which questions to respond to, may've created a certain impression about the integrity of your position.

Tell me something. How far does privacy stretch? If a stranger asks for your ID number, is that OK? Would you give it to them? What if you have some psychological or physiological condition, or some illness that would affect other people, and they ask you if you have some - would you consider yourself required to tell them? Even if it's a person you trust, like, your intimate partner?

[omnot.livejournal.com]

You think that was a misstep? How about a systemic disregard or overt abuse of power? (http://lauredhel.dreamwidth.org/555030.html)

You are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine; that you are aberrant in finding nothing uncomfortable in being routinely felt up by petty officials, and nauseatingly reprehensible for being scornful of people with culturally normative body taboos.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

You are obviously a psychopath if you can't understand the difference between an elbow and a genitals.

[qnetter]

You're obviously a sex-obsessed prude if you think it's significant.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that must be it. I can't express a bad enough insult to match you.

[qnetter]

Note the form of the statement. No less judgy than yours, which was the point.

Though I think when you've shared junk-touching with a couple of thousand folks, it becomes less of a bugaboo.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

You're still a psychopath.

[qnetter]

How on earth would you know, layman?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Your comments on this post make it quite obvious. And I have studied the subject enough to be able to make such a determination.

[qnetter]

You suggest someone has "psychological damage" if they object and someone else is a "sex-obsessed prude" when they point out the difference between a non-sexual appendage and an actual sex organ.

While I do think most people grossly over-distinguish between having their genitals touched and having other parts of their bodies touched, and don't take intent into account, my specific point in the latter case was to use the same "you must be" language that was out of order in the comment to which I was responding.

...we do live in a rape culture where the amount of children and women who are raped is absolutely astounding.

Man are raped as well. And I don't know what level would be "non-astounding."

don't want anyone feeling up my breasts or genitals unless it's my partner and he has my permission.

And I don't want you bumping my elbow. Note the difference in language -- one is "touching" and the other is "feeling up."

I don't accuse my doctor of "feeling me up" when he sticks a finger up my ass or grabs my balls -- his intent is non-sexual. I view this in the same way. I'm sure most of these folks don't want to be doing this any more than you want them to.