Wednesday, November 17, 2010

i have a question

when it comes to privacy, i'm usually all for it. what i choose to do behind closed doors to my body and with my body is nobody's business but my own and i am quite comfortable with the prospect of someday Answering to any Higher Authority for any use i may make of said body.

im also not a exactly a touchy-feely person - unless tequila's involved. so i totally sympathized with the passenger who told the TSA agent "don't touch my junk." i totally get why a female passenger might describe a TSA pat-down as "practically a strip-search." i would object to that, too.

but what i don't get...what i really don't why anyone would object to the full body scanners.

so what if they're like x-ray machines and people can SEE your junk? we ALL have junk, right? we ALL have nipples and butt-cheeks and belly buttons and pubic hair, right? so so freaking what?

in the name of security, i think i'd rather sashay clothed through a full body scanning machine than have ANYONE touch any part of me. and so what if some TSA agent in some distant room gets his jollies off by watching me? so freaking what?

i mean, seriously, Gentle Readers, have we really LOOKED at each other? sure, i understand there's questions about what the TSA could "do" with those pictures, but what does anyone think they COULD do? does anyone find those images sexually appealing?

and if they do...well, to that i say, whatever gets you through the night.

and furthermore, the war will end. blessed be.


Ayreonfae said...

I COMPLETELY agree with you, I do not understand the objection to the full body scanners.

~Onreeone~ said...

People just have to have something to complain about. It's the way of the world. Not that I like it and do try to stay away from the shit stirring, negative neds, but it is what it is and I do not see it changing anytime soon. Scan me, Pat me whatever you feel necessary in the name of security. Now, I'm not sure they'd let me on board if I had some tequila in me, cause my clothes have a way of just falling off. Blessed Be....

Walk in the Woods said...

I suppose if folks choose to travel in such ways, then they must bend to, and "choose" the rules that accompany it - in the name of "security" … or any other authoritative proclamation.

To me … it is yet one more representation of how willing "we" are to hand over our power to faceless authorities and assumed fears.

But hey - that's me … always the freakin' contrary. :) Besides, I don't really travel much anymore, so that's easy for me to say (not that that diminishes the kernel of truth for me).

Maritzia said...

The real issue with the scanners isn't lack of privacy, but the long term effects of the radiation. These might be small dosed, and it might be fine for occasional fliers. But those folks who fly frequently are rightfully concerned about cumulative exposure, for which no studies have been done.

If I had to fly, I'd probably go through the scanner because I fly so infrequently, but if I flew frequently, you better believe I would not be using those scanners.

Anonymous said...

It's a good thing I never fly unless I'm majorly drugged....because everyone's happy on xanax. Perhaps the TSA agents should hand out xanax prior to the scan?

Also, I could understand if a person who travels a lot is concerned about the radiation. That would be bothersome to me as well.

p.s. I snagged one of your buttons : )