New TSA stuff.
Nov. 26th, 2010 08:26 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
So here's what I think.
Zeroth, what was the old rigamarole (no liquids, take off your shoes, metal detectors, etc) for if it didn't keep us safe? And if it did keep us safe, why do we need the new rigamarole?
First, I want to at least see the face of the person who is seeing me naked. Seeing without being seen is a big power issue. Be glad I don't demand to see her naked too, because being clothed while other people are required to be naked is also a big power issue.
Second, note "her" in the sentence above. One of the reasons I want to see her face is I want to know she's a woman. I am culturally more comfortable at sharing "naked space," like a locker room, with people of my own gender. (Though, see above, "more comfortable" is not the same as "comfortable"--if I was sharing a locker room with a security guard in full uniform I might decide to skip the whole thing and go home in my gym clothes and change there. I don't get that option in the airport.)
I'm not prejudiced. I don't care if the woman seeing me naked is gay. I don't care if she's trans. But I want someone who says right out in public "I am a woman." I want someone who knows what it is to go though life among people who think your body is public property and your time belongs to whoever cares to claim it.
Because anything else is just, you will pardon the term, naked oppression.
Hat tip to Autographed Cat for the post that prompted the response I have expanded here.
Zeroth, what was the old rigamarole (no liquids, take off your shoes, metal detectors, etc) for if it didn't keep us safe? And if it did keep us safe, why do we need the new rigamarole?
First, I want to at least see the face of the person who is seeing me naked. Seeing without being seen is a big power issue. Be glad I don't demand to see her naked too, because being clothed while other people are required to be naked is also a big power issue.
Second, note "her" in the sentence above. One of the reasons I want to see her face is I want to know she's a woman. I am culturally more comfortable at sharing "naked space," like a locker room, with people of my own gender. (Though, see above, "more comfortable" is not the same as "comfortable"--if I was sharing a locker room with a security guard in full uniform I might decide to skip the whole thing and go home in my gym clothes and change there. I don't get that option in the airport.)
I'm not prejudiced. I don't care if the woman seeing me naked is gay. I don't care if she's trans. But I want someone who says right out in public "I am a woman." I want someone who knows what it is to go though life among people who think your body is public property and your time belongs to whoever cares to claim it.
Because anything else is just, you will pardon the term, naked oppression.
Hat tip to Autographed Cat for the post that prompted the response I have expanded here.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-26 05:53 pm (UTC)These gender issues matter to me over and above the whole security theater aspect, though I agree with you about what the avoidance of backscatter machines on the busiest travel day of the year implies about how necessary they really are.
Thanks, Cat, you make me *think*...
I think you make yourself think, actually, but I am glad to have accidentally provided the happy chance of inspiration.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-26 06:44 pm (UTC)Ultimately, rape and sexual assault (and this is definitely the latter, under color of law) are about power. Your insistence on being "inspected" by a woman is (from my POV) taking *some* of that power back... but I'm not one for half measures. I want freedom to travel with dignity for *everyone*, and I'm not going to sit down or shut up until I get it. (I also want just plain old dignity for everyone, straight, gay, transgender, both, neither, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Pagan, or Pastafarian... and I'm not going to shut up until I get that, either. But the TSA is the thing that's got people fired up right now, so I'm going to whack that mole until I split its skull and force a clue in edgewise...)
no subject
Date: 2010-11-26 07:40 pm (UTC)Males can get upset about this, because even male dignity is under assault, which is not usually the case. I am, of course, happy to see males worrying about human dignity, but am saving the bulk of my rejoicing for if and when their concern for human dignity continues after male dignity is restored.
It's not like people are going to quit trying to manipulate each other. (Not to mention that implying that female manipulation is the equivalent of male violence AND male manipulation just doesn't happen is--let's leave it at "just wrong" for the moment and not get into men's rights activists, since comments don't have enough space for how I feel about *that.*)
Suffice it to say that not caring about violence until head games stop is just not caring about violence period.
Now you want to put a stop to all security theater, fine, go for it; I'm certainly not disagreeing with that, it's just not the issue I was talking about.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-26 08:08 pm (UTC)You have a good point about the TSA operations and how they affect everybody. Cat has a good point about the TSA operations and how they specifically additionally affect women. It's her journal, she gets to decide which good point we're discussing at the moment.
no subject
Date: 2010-11-26 11:06 pm (UTC)This. THIS.
Go, pocketnaomi!
no subject
Date: 2010-11-26 11:11 pm (UTC)