Raging cunt gets TSA employee fired

[Rucksinator]

This is the original tweet (http://twitpic.com/753bq9)

This is a site where she shows righteous indignation (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/10/24/your-tax-dollars-at-work-2/)

Here is a story with more details (http://www.dailydot.com/news/tsa-jill-filipovic-vibrator-note-freak-on/)

Basically, this cunt with a website went through customs with a vibrator. This fact was not made public (by the TSA agent) in any way. Upon arriving at her room the cunt discovered a note that appears to reference the fact that she had a vibrator in her bag. This cunt then went to the internet to point out the fact that someone whose job it was to go through her luggage discovered a vibrator, and instead of just letting it go, this TSA agent left her a personal note. This cunt decided to make a big deal about this and get some publicity for her blog/twitter feed so she acted like this was a huge invasion of her privacy and a hugely innappropriate act by a TSA agent that was just being a human being.

“Total violation of privacy, wildly inappropriate and clearly not ok, but I also just died laughing in my hotel room.”



In more recent news, the agent was fired. (http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/25/8481160-tsa-worker-who-left-sex-toy-note-will-be-fired)

First of all, the "violation of privacy" was this TSA agent's job. The note was probably somewhat inappropriate, but really just a human acting like a human. The reward for this TSA agent trying to act like a human being to another human being instead of acting like an uncaring robot is losing her job. No wonder public service workers act like uncaring, inhuman robots; they will lose their jobs otherwise.

Congratulations, cunt, you got your 15 minutes of fame, and all it cost you was a faceless person's job. It cost the rest of the world the likelyhood that we will be able to encounter somebody to wants to keep a job that acts like a human being instead of a robot, but you got your publicity.

I'd flame you on your twitpic, but I don't tweet. I'd flame you on your blog, but I don't want to subscribe. So I'm doing it here.

[Lord Feldon]

Now I know what the world's tiniest violin sounds like.

[Roderick Femm]

This reminds me of that episode of South Park where there was a counter for how many times they said "shit" on the air.

In any case, your outrage is overdone.


Roddy

[drachillix]

Upon arriving at her room the cunt discovered a note that appears to reference the fact that she had a vibrator in her bag. This cunt then went to the internet to point out the fact that someone whose job it was to go through her luggage discovered a vibrator, and instead of just letting it go, this TSA agent left her a personal note.

Why would a TSA agent leave any kind of note or comment? I would be a little weirded out about any correspondence of that sort left by TSA.

[Spiny Norman]

The note was probably somewhat inappropriate...

Ya think?

[Anaamika]

Who the fuck cares. If they didn't want to be fired, they should have remained professional. And it's TSA. No sympathy here.

[Troppus]

Same agency which promised discretion when given the power to see through our clothes? Same agency trusted with patting our privates, and going through our personal items?

Inappropriate, unprofessional, indiscrete, creepy, and jerkish behavior. The agent was totally out of line. And the OP shows an equal degree of cluelessness.

[Oakminster]

This cunt decided to make a big deal about this and get some publicity for her blog/twitter feed so she acted like this was a huge invasion of her privacy and a hugely innappropriate act by a TSA agent that was just being a human being.


In what universe is making an unprofessional comment on an official document "just being a human being"?

[Rucksinator]

My apololgies. I didn't realize that the BBQ pit was reserved for cases of genocide.


Who the fuck cares. If they didn't want to be fired, they should have remained professional. And it's TSA. No sympathy here.

[emphasis added]

This is part of what got me riled up. Comments on this story implied that it was justified for TSA employees to get the shaft because the TSA violates our privacy. This employee didn't decide that everybody's bags should get a thorough going-through.

[Troppus]

OP, please include a photograph of the contents of your wallet, nightstand drawer, and/or travel bag as we feel compelled to comment. K thx bye

[Sparky the Wonder Spirit]

The employee DID decide to behave extremely non-professionally though. I have no sympathy.

[Oakminster]

You're pitting the wrong person. The TSA agent fucked up in amazingly stupid fashion. If they gave Darwin Awards for career killing moves, this would win a prize.

[tumbleddown]

First, could you be a little bit more of a raging misogynist assmonkey? Here's a hint, douchebag, the word "cunt" is a slur, and just because you don't like something a woman does, you don't any more right to call her a cunt than you have the right to call a black person who does something you don't like a n****r. Get your act together.

Second, 15 minutes of fame? The woman is a published author and highly respected and frequently requested speaker around the country. Are you? No? Who's grasping for straws now?

Third, the TSA jackass was unprofessional and inappropriate in every imaginable way. They violated the rules of their job, and did so in a way that was invasive and offensive.

If you want to keep your job, you follow the fucking rules. If you don't want to be a creepy fuckstick, you don't leave creepy fuckstick notes on people's personal items, whether they're vibrators or anything else. If you do decide to break the rules and act like a creepy fuckstick in the bargain, you lose your damn job. Thems the breaks. Too bad, so sad.

[Troppus]

This is part of what got me riled up. Comments on this story implied that it was justified for TSA employees to get the shaft because the TSA violates our privacy.

No, TSA agent was fired because we entrust them with our privacy.

Sneeze-burger: fire the fast food employee.

Dentist who cops a feel while patient is gassed: fired.

Drunk pilot: fired.

Teacher who touches children inappropriately: fired.

This wasn't some dumbass fellow passenger in the adjoining seat who spied the toy in her bag and left a creepy note. This was an employee trained to respect our privacy as they complete their job of checking for weapons. Weapons and potential weapons should be their only professional concern.

See where I'm going with this? It's not too late to admit your knee-jerk reaction might have been premature.

[runner pat]

No, TSA agent was fired because we entrust them with our privacy.

Sneeze-burger: fire the fast food employee.

Dentist who cops a feel while patient is gassed: fired.

Drunk pilot: fired.

Teacher who touches children inappropriately: fired.

This wasn't some dumbass fellow passenger in the adjoining seat who spied the toy in her bag and left a creepy note. This was an employee trained to respect our privacy as they complete their job of checking for weapons. Weapons and potential weapons should be their only professional concern.

See where I'm going with this? It's not too late to admit your knee-jerk reaction might have been premature.

I don't believe this part is true. ;)

[PlainJain]

My apololgies. I didn't realize that the BBQ pit was reserved for cases of genocide.
Who said that? You are well within your rights to vent about this story here... just as we are free to point out how stupid you are for doing it.

[Troppus]

I don't believe this part is true. ;)

Well, the statement of intent is there, anyways.

30 seconds of Google-fu renders the relevant job provisions: "Enforce a zero tolerance policy for any form of harassment in the workplace and in the treatment of the public we serve." (http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/civil_rights_policy.pdf)

[R. P. McMurphy]

It's hard to believe that anybody is coming to the defense of the TSA agent.
But then, there's always someone.

Limpdick, what if they had opened your bag found a condom and left a note that said "too small for Magnums, huh?" Or they had found some lotion/lubricant and left a note saying, "have fun, gayboy."

The more and faster we can get some of asshats that work for the TSA on to the unemployment line the better the world will be.

[psychobunny]

My first reaction was that of course the TSA agent should be fired! Glad to see that I'm not alone. That was completely unprofessional!

[El_Kabong]

Get your freak on, OP.

Oh, wait; guess you already did.

[Lamia]

Basically, this cunt with a website went through customs with a vibrator. This fact was not made public (by the TSA agent) in any way. Upon arriving at her room the cunt discovered a note that appears to reference the fact that she had a vibrator in her bag. This cunt then went to the internet to point out the fact that someone whose job it was to go through her luggage discovered a vibrator, and instead of just letting it go, this TSA agent left her a personal note. This cunt decided to make a big deal about this and get some publicity for her blog/twitter feed so she acted like this was a huge invasion of her privacy and a hugely innappropriate act by a TSA agent that was just being a human being.So are all women "cunts" to you, or just ones that own vibrators? Or maybe just ones that have opinions about things?

Going from just your OP I was feeling little sympathy for this TSA worker, then I read what the note actually said and felt no sympathy at all. It wasn't "Whoops, we thought this might be a bomb" or something, it was "GET YOUR FREAK ON GIRL". That's the kind of thing that may be appropriate to say to a friend, but coming from an anonymous security worker is freaking creepy. If TSA workers want to have a little laugh amongst themselves when they find sex toys or other interesting items in people's baggage then that's one thing, but in their interactions with the public they should remain professional. Leaving Ms. Filipovic any kind of personal note at all was questionable, as I don't believe that's TSA's usual practice. I've never even received something innocent like a "HAVE A NICE DAY!" or "ENJOY YOUR TRIP!", and I certainly would not be expecting comments about my personal possessions much less a "humorous" remark about my sexual behavior.

[runner pat]

Another incident. (http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/001031.php)
Seth Goldberg says that when he opened his suitcase in San Diego after a flight from Seattle this month, the two "No Iraq War" signs he'd picked up at the Pike Place Market were still nestled among his clothes.

But there was a third sign, he said, that shocked him. Tucked in his luggage was a card from the Transportation Security Administration notifying him that his bags had been opened and inspected at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Handwritten on the side of the card was a note, "Don't appreciate your anti-American attitude!"

[woodstockbirdybird]

The OP is so wildly back-asswards as to which party is worthy of outrage that I really have to believe we are all being whooshed and the whole thing's pure sarcasm. I shudder to consider the alternative.

[Odesio]

This is part of what got me riled up. Comments on this story implied that it was justified for TSA employees to get the shaft because the TSA violates our privacy. This employee didn't decide that everybody's bags should get a thorough going-through.

Guard: "Sorry, Luke, jus' doin' my job."

Luke: "Sayin' it's your job don't make it right, boss."

[jjimm]

I'm all for unprofessionalism in the workplace, a lot of the time it's the only way to get by. And I'm totally down with irreverernce - but this really went over the line.

TSA person: funny but completely unprofessional, firing inevitable.

Woman who complained: not a cunt.

OP: misguided.

[Grumman]

Another incident. (http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/001031.php)
Handwritten on the side of the card was a note, "Don't appreciate your anti-American attitude!"
'Cause we all know what the Founding Fathers thought of free speech, don't we? :smack:

[The Other Jeffrey Lebowski]

this cunt...
the cunt...
This cunt...
This cunt...
Congratulations, cunt....
Bolding mine.
OP - you're the cunt.

[Shakes]

What exactly is crossing the line with you OP?

[BigT]

Huh. A thread sympathizing with the TSA. Can the OP make me care? *clicks* Nope. Except that I now think the OP is a creepy person with no social skills.

[Lightnin']

This OP is some sort of parody, right? I mean, nobody in their right mind could defend that TSA jerk, right?

[Slithy Tove]

Raging cunt gets TSA employee fired


What's the difference between a feminist blogger who defends her sexual dignity, and a Pygmy who trains his dog in a wire enclosure?

[Ravenman]

I have defended the TSA on a number of things, including the full body scanners. The assumption I make is that sensitive things like looking at those sorts of images, frisking someone, or going through their bags can be reasonable security precautions if they are done professionally, and that those who do not act in an adult manner with their responsibilities will be dealt with.

The system worked here.

And the OP clearly has some problem with women.

[ladyfoxfyre]

What a bullshit OP. Yes, the TSA agent deserved to be fired. "Just being human"? The note was unprofessional and unnecessary.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Note to TSA bag-searchers: if you must succumb to your urge to make merry, go the fortune-cookie route and leave a note saying "Help! I'm an undereducated, poorly trained drone trapped in a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy!"

[jz78817]

Guard: "Sorry, Luke, jus' doin' my job."

Luke: "Sayin' it's your job don't make it right, boss."

You know who else was "just doing his job?"

Goebbels.

[CrazyCatLady]

So are all women "cunts" to you, or just ones that own vibrators? Or maybe just ones that have opinions about things?

Somehow, I suspect it's that last option.

If TSA workers want to have a little laugh amongst themselves when they find sex toys or other interesting items in people's baggage then that's one thing, but in their interactions with the public they should remain professional.

And I'm quite sure they do indeed laugh about some of these things. I know doctors laugh about the various things people come into the ER to have removed from their asses, or some of the more amusing/bizarre body modifications they see, but they do their laughing in private. They don't sit there in the exam room smirking at someone's penis tattoo and say "So what's wrong with Mr. Cherry Buster today?" Doing so would result in reports being filed with their boss and the medical review board, and rightly so.

[Ca3799]

Well, using the OP's logic (or what little there is of it), it's not the bloggers fault the TSA employee got fired. It's the TSA's fault!

And what's up with all the "cunt" comments. Not getting any lately? I think I know why....

[not what you'd expect]

I think the TSA agent exercised extremely poor judgment. He did not have a relationship with this woman that allows for this kind of joking or mild flirting or whatever he thought he was doing.

I don't have an opinion on whether he should have been fired or maybe just written up, because I don't know enough about his work history. If this was his first screw up and he's been an agent for 30 years, I might suggest some sensitivity training instead, but who knows.

He did something pretty stupid. That is for sure. As for the female, she certainly has done nothing wrong up to this point. And absolutely does not deserve to be labeled a cunt for being offended by his stupidity.

[monstro]

If I had gotten that note in my bag, I would have laughed and been done with it.

But there's one thing to know, in a theoretical sense, that your bags will be pawed through. It's another to actually get confirmation of it. I don't like the idea of the contents of my bags being conversation fodder at the water cooler. It wouldn't be enough to keep me from flying, but I could see that--along with all the other crap we have to put up with at the airport--persuading someone to go "Fuck it!" and take the train from now on.

So it's possible to find humor in what the TSA person did and still think it was an infraction serious enough for them to be fired.

[Kobal2]

TBH, while I do think what the TSA guy did is mondo creepy and unprofessional, I don't think he deserved to get shitcanned over it.
It's not like he wanked on her clothes or something - it's just the equivalent of the checkout guy making comments on your purchases as he scans them. Yes, it's extremely annoying but, you know, whatevs. Were I his supervisor, I'd just take him to my office, scream at him for about half an hour then release him on the assumption that shit like this wouldn't ever, ever happen again. And if it does, yes, by all means, fire the goddamn idiot.

Speaking of which, OP, consider yourself screamed at for half an hour.

Then again, tempest in a teapot scandals like this always seem to involve a kind of Dark Vador-ish response from the higher ups, most often under pressure from the out-for-blood onlookers who haven't got thing one to do with anything. "You have failed me, under the bus with you". I don't really get it.

[Troppus]

TBH, while I do think what the TSA guy did is mondo creepy and unprofessional, I don't think he deserved to get shitcanned over it.
It's not like he wanked on her clothes or something - it's just the equivalent of the checkout guy making comments on your purchases as he scans them. Yes, it's extremely annoying but, you know, whatevs.

I don't think that any of us feel that the flyer was scared or even made fearful by her experience. She expressed annoyance; she didn't cry rape. The highly trained TSA employee has been given the power to invade our privacy to the nth degree, and is rightfully held to higher standards than a grocery store cashier. It was a jerk move and not an assault, but a zero tolerance policy is what it is. Agent was way out of line, and once the dick move was made public, supervisor had no choice but to let the agent go. TSA really can't afford more PR problems.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

"Of course it's TSA policy never to, imply ownership in the event of a dildo... always use the indefinite article a dildo, never your dildo."

[Monty]

TBH, while I do think what the TSA guy did is mondo creepy and unprofessional, I don't think he deserved to get shitcanned over it.

You know who else thinks that way? Yep, the woman the OP's railing about (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/28/tsas-get-your-freak-on-gi_n_1064451.html?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%7C108452) is who:
By Wednesday, when she had learned the TSA agent had been suspended, she wrote that she feared she would always be known for the tale and that she wanted the by-then viral story to fade away. She also didn't want the worker to be fired as a scapegoat.

"The problem with the note," she wrote, "is that it's representative of the bigger privacy intrusions that the U.S. government, through the TSA and other sources, levels every day."

[Clothahump]

This is the original tweet (http://twitpic.com/753bq9)

This is a site where she shows righteous indignation (http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/10/24/your-tax-dollars-at-work-2/)

Here is a story with more details (http://www.dailydot.com/news/tsa-jill-filipovic-vibrator-note-freak-on/)

Basically, this cunt with a website went through customs with a vibrator. This fact was not made public (by the TSA agent) in any way. Upon arriving at her room the cunt discovered a note that appears to reference the fact that she had a vibrator in her bag. This cunt then went to the internet to point out the fact that someone whose job it was to go through her luggage discovered a vibrator, and instead of just letting it go, this TSA agent left her a personal note. This cunt decided to make a big deal about this and get some publicity for her blog/twitter feed so she acted like this was a huge invasion of her privacy and a hugely innappropriate act by a TSA agent that was just being a human being.

First off, she's not a cunt. She's a woman. The TSA agent acted in a totally disrespectful manner to her, but I guess that doesn't matter to you, because after all, she's just a cunt.



In more recent news, the agent was fired. (http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/10/25/8481160-tsa-worker-who-left-sex-toy-note-will-be-fired)

And rightfully so.


First of all, the "violation of privacy" was this TSA agent's job.

Stop right there. The TSA agent performed an illegal search of her luggage. I realize that it's all PC and everything to allow stuff like that to happen, but the cold, hard reality was that there was no probable cause for the search and under the 4th Amendment, it was illegal. Of course, the 4th Amendment gets gang-raped thousands of times a day at every airport in the country, but hey, who cares? It's just the Constitution, after all.


The note was probably somewhat inappropriate, but really just a human acting like a human.
If that's the way you think human beings should act, no wonder our society is as fucked up as it is.

Your pitting echoes Massive Fail to the far mountaintops.

[Rucksinator]

OP, please include a photograph of the contents of your wallet, nightstand drawer, and/or travel bag as we feel compelled to comment. K thx bye

Uh, why would I want to do that?

[runner pat]

Uh, why would I want to do that?

So we can point and laugh.

[Rucksinator]

.....Limpdick, what if they had opened your bag found a condom and left a note that said "too small for Magnums, huh?" ...

I think a more appropriate analogy would be if the note said "Play on, playa!"

Perhaps people are reading the "freak" part of the note as an insult. I didn't read it that way. I read it as saying, basically, "You go girl!"

If the note had, in fact, said "You go girl!", would all of you still think that it was a wildly innappropriate violation of privacy?

[Ravenman]

If the note had, in fact, said "You go girl!", would all of you still think that it was a wildly innappropriate violation of privacy?
Yes. Without question.

So, back to the real question in this pitting: what is the root cause of your misogyny?

[Rucksinator]

....And what's up with all the "cunt" comments. Not getting any lately? I think I know why....

I had been drinking when I wrote this. In hindsight, only 1 or 2 uses of the word would have sufficed.

[Troppus]

Yes. Without question.

So, back to the real question in this pitting: what is the root cause of your misogyny?

WAG: hot blogger prefers a vibe over some Rucksinator.

[Rucksinator]

So we can point and laugh.

But what does that have to do with the OP?

[Troppus]

But what does that have to do with the OP?

Empathy describes the ability to identify with another person's feelings and experience. We would like the opportunity to comment on your personal, private possessions in order to test your tolerance for invasions of privacy. Put yourself in her place, would you?

[Rucksinator]

Empathy describes the ability to identify with another person's feelings and experience. We would like the opportunity to comment on your personal, private possessions in order to test your tolerance for invasions of privacy. Put yourself in her place, would you?

Perhaps you didn't read the story.

The TSA agent did not take a picture of the vibrator and post it on the internet. The TSA agent wrote a personal note.

The blogger posted the note and the fact that she was travelling with a vibrator on the internet. Every revelation of this blogger's luggage contents came from her herself.

The only invasion of privacy came while the TSA agent was doing her job. Now, some people feel that TSA agents' jobs are violations of the 4th amendment. That may be, but that's another debate. Many here seem to really hate the TSA and enjoy a story about one of theirs losing their job.

I don't believe that I have actually flown since 9-11, so I haven't had any negative experiences with the TSA. Perhaps if I had I would be with everybody else going "fuck the TSA, and fuck TSA agents!" (I would hope not.)

[Eva Luna]

I think a more appropriate analogy would be if the note said "Play on, playa!"

Perhaps people are reading the "freak" part of the note as an insult. I didn't read it that way. I read it as saying, basically, "You go girl!"

If the note had, in fact, said "You go girl!", would all of you still think that it was a wildly innappropriate violation of privacy?

I would. Personal commentary on someone's sexual equipment/activities while you are working in a professional role is inappropriate, period. Even if nobody else has to see it.

[JoelUpchurch]

I guess I'm officially too frigging old. My brain kind of froze with the idea that a woman wouldn't have a problem with letting her friends, family and coworkers know that she travels with a vibrator. I'm sure a lot of women do that, but I would think few women would want to share that information on their blog.

BTW, I think the TSA agent should have been fired.

[Troppus]

Perhaps you didn't read the story.

The TSA agent did not take a picture of the vibrator and post it on the internet. The TSA agent wrote a personal note.

The blogger posted the note and the fact that she was travelling with a vibrator on the internet. Every revelation of this blogger's luggage contents came from her herself.

The only invasion of privacy came while the TSA agent was doing her job. Now, some people feel that TSA agents' jobs are violations of the 4th amendment. That may be, but that's another debate. Many here seem to really hate the TSA and enjoy a story about one of theirs losing their job.

I don't believe that I have actually flown since 9-11, so I haven't had any negative experiences with the TSA. Perhaps if I had I would be with everybody else going "fuck the TSA, and fuck TSA agents!" (I would hope not.)

Perhaps you are incapable of getting the point. Consider the incredible responsibility of respecting the privacy of travelers while insuring our safety. Read the zero tolerance policy I linked to. Look up the definition of "professionalism" and "discretion".

The agent was incredibly indiscrete, unprofessional, and in obvious violation of the rules of his/her job.

[Bricker]

I don't expect my doctor to remind me he's had his camera up my ass, even though it happened and I was well aware of it when it happened.

I don't expect the TSA agents to remind me they've seen my private possessions, even though I know they may have. My collection of nude Ernest Borgnine pictures is private; I surrender that privacy when I pack them for flight, but not for little notes thereafter, regardless of whether the notes show approbation, indifference, or dismay.

[Oakminster]

The TSA agent wrote a personal note.



That's the problem. The TSA agent has no business writing personal notes. The job is pretty simple...check luggage for prohibited items. If found, sound the alarm. Otherwise, close luggage and move on to the next one.

[Troppus]

I guess I'm officially too frigging old. My brain kind of froze with the idea that a woman wouldn't have a problem with letting her friends, family and coworkers know that she travels with a vibrator. I'm sure a lot of women do that, but I would think few women would want to share that information on their blog.

BTW, I think the TSA agent should have been fired.

Well, this isn't the issue at all, but thanks for sharing your prudishness. Sex is a natural, biological inclination and many, many people have few if any hang-ups about enjoying it. If it comforts you, please continue to assume that women have zero interest in sex outside of procreation and the vibrator in question was for her achy back. Feel better?

The agent's opinion of the blogger's extracurricular activities was about as welcome and relevant as yours. Policy was violated; job terminated. End of story.

[An Gadaí]

That reminds me of the time they were x-raying my brother's bags in Heathrow. His bag went through the scanner and the line stopped, the inspector opened up his bag, and rifled through it and found this toy Godzilla he'd bought in London. The inspector held it up to her colleagues and said "Does this remind you of anyone?" and they all started laughing. She held him up so she could get a cheap laugh. He just thought it was hilarious and went on his merry way.

[Kobal2]

If the note had, in fact, said "You go girl!", would all of you still think that it was a wildly innappropriate violation of privacy?

Yes. It's not what the note said, it's that there was a note at all.
To go back to my earlier analogy, it doesn't really matter whether the cashier congratulates me for picking the classiest can of ravioli in the store, or goes ":rolleyes: Ugh. Ravioli, really ?". In both cases I wish he'd just STFU, ring my shit up, take my money, end of interaction.

Well, this isn't the issue at all, but thanks for sharing your prudishness. Sex is a natural, biological inclination and many, many people have few if any hang-ups about enjoying it. If it comforts you, please continue to assume that women have zero interest in sex outside of procreation and the vibrator in question was for her achy back. Feel better?

You must be a hoot at parties.

[Vinyl Turnip]

I don't expect the TSA agents to remind me they've seen my private possessions, even though I know they may have.

I think they are required to leave the note of inspection, although certainly not to editorialize on it. As to the agent "just being human," personally I don't want them to be human while they're rifling through my bags—I'd prefer they be as robotic as possible, or ideally an actual robot. I'd rather learn that my underwear was "inspected by #7" rather than "fondled by Mildred Johnson."

Second (and last) bit of advice to TSA agents: if you're going to do something like this to someone, try not to pick a feminist blogger. Jeez, talk about your shit luck.

[Rucksinator]

... To go back to my earlier analogy, it doesn't really matter whether the cashier congratulates me for picking the classiest can of ravioli in the store, or goes ":rolleyes: Ugh. Ravioli, really ?". In both cases I wish he'd just STFU, ring my shit up, take my money, end of interaction...

Well, I guess that's the difference between you and me; I don't mind a litle bit of human interaction. There have been times when I was checking out with chili powder, ground beef, and cans of beans and tomatoes. When the cashier made a comment about making chili I didn't try to have her fired, I just recognized the fact that she was a human that was being sociable.

Since this annoys you, you should try out the self-checkout lines.

[CrazyCatLady]

If the note had, in fact, said "You go girl!", would all of you still think that it was a wildly innappropriate violation of privacy?

Yes. If your mom/sister/wife went to get a mammogram and her discharge paperwork contained a handwritten note "Nice rack!" would you think that was a perfectly acceptable interaction? What about if you went to the urologist and they added a "personal note" about your dick? That kind of shit would earn a doctor professional sanctions for inappropriate behavior, and rightly so.

There are professions that involve having intimate contact with people who are in essence strangers and would never allow that sort of contact in any other circumstances. When you have a job like that, you're in essence saying "It's okay for me to see you naked/probe your orifices/paw through your personal possessions; I'm a professional." But it is 100% incumbent upon you to act in a professional manner. That means you invade that person's space/body/privacy exactly as far as necessary to do your job and not one centimeter further. No extra contact, no commentary, no wink-wink, nudge-nudge.

[Crazyhorse]

Well, on the one hand the TSA agent obviously abused their position and conducted themselves inappropriately. But on the other hand... whoops, Ms. Filipovic's hand is not available for comment at this time.

She wrote that she almost died laughing in her hotel room so those of you getting all worked up about how violated she was might want to keep that in mind. Justified though she may be in her outrage if she did have any, she is still being an attention whore about it to get blog hits. She could have easily handled this with the TSA directly and discretely and had a better chance of causing real change. Instead she took it to her blog and forced the TSA to make an example of the screener in front of the court of public opinion without ever addressing their own practices and policies (which she allegedly now says is all she ever wanted to do). So one screener gets fired, she gets almost 2 million hits on her blog and some new advertisers, and nothing else changes.

[Fear Itself]

Second (and last) bit of advice to TSA agents: if you're going to do something like this to someone, try not to pick a feminist blogger. Jeez, talk about your shit luck.Isn't the presence of a vibrator fair warning?

[Kobal2]

Well, I guess that's the difference between you and me; I don't mind a litle bit of human interaction. There have been times when I was checking out with chili powder, ground beef, and cans of beans and tomatoes. When the cashier made a comment about making chili I didn't try to have her fired, I just recognized the fact that she was a human that was being sociable.

Since this annoys you, you should try out the self-checkout lines.

No such thing in France, sadly. I'd use them in a heartbeat. I like to keep my "social events where neither of us actually wants to be here" quota to a minimum.

That being said, read above. I already said firing the TSA mook was over the top AFAIC, and other posted have already noted that the "cunt" did no such thing as yell for them to lose their job either.
But if I still had an active blog, and my friendly neighbourhood cashier commented one way or the other on my purchase of Mega Extra Large Reinforced Condoms (:D), I'd probably make a short post about my annoyance, yeah. And I'd be mortified if that post ever took a life of its own and ended up resulting in that sweet girl losing her drone job. I'd probably make a post about her hierarchical superiors being utter pricks, too.

[fumster]

Well, on the one hand the TSA agent obviously abused their position and conducted themselves inappropriately. But on the other hand... whoops, Ms. Filipovic's hand is not available for comment at this time.

She wrote that she almost died laughing in her hotel room so those of you getting all worked up about how violated she was might want to keep that in mind. Justified though she may be in her outrage if she did have any, she is still being an attention whore about it to get blog hits. She could have easily handled this with the TSA directly and discretely and had a better chance of causing real change. Instead she took it to her blog and forced the TSA to make an example of the screener in front of the court of public opinion without ever addressing their own practices and policies (which she allegedly now says is all she ever wanted to do). So one screener gets fired, she gets almost 2 million hits on her blog and some new advertisers, and nothing else changes.You are so missing the point I don't even know where to begin:

1) It doesn't matter if she thought it was funny, it was objectively inappropriate. It's way over the line.

2) This same person might be doing it to other women, some of whom may not be as willing to laugh it off. Can you imagine a teenage girl having someone comment on her underwear?

3) Putting the information on the blog was a public service. How are Americans supposed to stop people in positions of power from abusing it unless we know about it?

4) The TSA worker deserved to be fired and will be lucky if he is not prosecuted.

5) She is not being an attention whore, she just wrote about what happened to her. The fact that what she wrote caused such an uproar is evidence of how inappropriate it was.

6) At long last have you no sense of decency?

[tumbleddown]

Well, on the one hand the TSA agent obviously abused their position and conducted themselves inappropriately. But on the other hand... whoops, Ms. Filipovic's hand is not available for comment at this time.

She wrote that she almost died laughing in her hotel room so those of you getting all worked up about how violated she was might want to keep that in mind. Justified though she may be in her outrage if she did have any, she is still being an attention whore about it to get blog hits.
She only blogged about it because her offhand tweet (made at the time while she was busy) was noticed and gained a lot of attention and a lot of people were asking about the situation in a way that couldn't be reasonably described in 140 characters.

And it's well in context with at least a half dozen prior posts on that site -- which she doesn't need to "whore" to get hits on, it's one of the largest feminist blogs in existence with several thousand hits per day -- about the TSA and their legally sanctioned invasions of travelers' privacy and the implications of it. It's also completely in context with countless posts about societal reactions women's sexuality.
She could have easily handled this with the TSA directly and discretely and had a better chance of causing real change.
She had no intention of "handling" it with TSA at all, until it blew up larger than she had ever imagined because of the tweet. (Which is where the photo of the note came from.)
Instead she took it to her blog and forced the TSA to make an example of the screener in front of the court of public opinion without ever addressing their own practices and policies (which she allegedly now says is all she ever wanted to do). So one screener gets fired, she gets almost 2 million hits on her blog and some new advertisers, and nothing else changes.
I like how you think Jill has some obligation to try to effect change within the TSA, and doesn't have the right to tweet about something that affects her in the moment, or respond about it on her blog when pressed for further comment.

I also like how you think a blog which uses a closed network for a small strip of ads is going to gain ad revenue from this. Not how it works.

[Terraplane]

She could have easily handled this with the TSA directly and discretely and had a better chance of causing real change. Instead she took it to her blog and forced the TSA to make an example of the screener in front of the court of public opinion without ever addressing their own practices and policies (which she allegedly now says is all she ever wanted to do). So one screener gets fired, she gets almost 2 million hits on her blog and some new advertisers, and nothing else changes.[/SIZE][/FONT]

Why in the world do you change your font size?

Anyway, fuck working with the TSA. A quiet call to a supervisor is certainly not going to put the TSA under the scrutiny that media attention would so she's more likely to cause real change by doing what she did. The agent in the story acted unbelievably unprofessional and with a complete disregard for the privacy, or at least the last illusion of privacy, that airplane travelers have left and she deserves to be fired. I'm amazed that somebody would defend this shit.

[Lamia]

She could have easily handled this with the TSA directly and discretely and had a better chance of causing real change.By "better" do you mean "zero"? Because that's how much chance I would estimate a discreet, direct communication with TSA would have had of causing "real change". I'd say the odds would be good that TSA would have done nothing at all in such a situation, although it's possible they would have decided to reprimand or fire the employee responsible for the note. But I don't think there's any chance at all that a single, private complaint would cause TSA to seriously re-evaluate its policies and procedures.

[Crazyhorse]

And it's well in context with at least a half dozen prior posts on that site -- which she doesn't need to "whore" to get hits on, it's one of the largest feminist blogs in existence with several thousand hits per day -- about the TSA and their legally sanctioned invasions of travelers' privacy and the implications of it.

"Drive until you hit the ocean" is always a good plan. -- viewed 630 times

Just paid five euro to look at this statue of a goat. Tourism! -- viewed 720 times

Getting my Joyce on. -- viewed 1620 times

Just unpacked my suitcase and found this note from TSA. Guess they discovered a "personal item" in my bag. Wow. -- viewed 206625 times

[Capitaine Zombie]

Another incident. (http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/001031.php)

That's ten times worse than the OP, if confirmed.
See, that's the problem with the OP and anyone inclined to share the same rant. When you have morons in position of authority, it is imperative that they follow a strict set of rules. They're not in a position of authority over you because they're superior to you, either morally or intellectually, but because their task requires it. When those people start acting like they're your fucking life supervisor or overseer, it's time to do away with them. And in a hard way, if possible.

TBH, while I do think what the TSA guy did is mondo creepy and unprofessional, I don't think he deserved to get shitcanned over it.
It's not like he wanked on her clothes or something - it's just the equivalent of the checkout guy making comments on your purchases as he scans them. Yes, it's extremely annoying but, you know, whatevs. .

No, it's the equivalent of finding a personal note from the cashier tucked into your groceries when you unload them at home. That's a few more notches up on the creepy factor.

[Crazyhorse]

Why in the world do you change your font size?

I don't. Apparently vBulletin does.

Anyway, fuck working with the TSA. A quiet call to a supervisor is certainly not going to put the TSA under the scrutiny that media attention would so she's more likely to cause real change by doing what she did. The agent in the story acted unbelievably unprofessional and with a complete disregard for the privacy, or at least the last illusion of privacy, that airplane travelers have left and she deserves to be fired. I'm amazed that somebody would defend this shit.

I would be amazed too - I don't defend it. I think they deserve to be fired but the blogger says she didn't ever intend for them to be. And she only wanted to draw attention to the larger, generic TSA not the screener. If all discrete and normal means of complaint failed, then I could understand taking it to the blog but doing that first, and later claiming her intention was never to get anyone in trouble is ingenuous or stupid.

[Troppus]

She could have easily handled this with the TSA directly and discretely and had a better chance of causing real change. Instead she took it to her blog and forced the TSA to make an example of the screener in front of the court of public opinion without ever addressing their own practices and policies (which she allegedly now says is all she ever wanted to do). So one screener gets fired, she gets almost 2 million hits on her blog and some new advertisers, and nothing else changes.

It wouldn't have mattered how she addressed it. The agent would have been fired as per the Zero Tolerance Policy. The blog, the number of hits, the press...none of this has to do with the agent's unprofessional violation of policy.

The agent would have been fired for the violation whether it was handled discreetly or published on a billboard.

[Morgenstern]

One down, probably 50,000 more to go.

[Sampiro]

So it's possible to find humor in what the TSA person did and still think it was an infraction serious enough for them to be fired.

Co-signed.

Most EMTs and cops I've known had really morbid, sometimes hysterical, senses of humor and making tasteless jokes is one way they cope with their job. However, if one made a joke to the widow or family member of the person whose death they were investigating it would be fireable. It's not the act but the indiscretion.

A bit off topic, but I've wondered how many five-finger-confiscations go on in airports and other places where people are allowed to search others belongings. Few women would probably be too embarrassed to report a missing vibrator (particularly if it was an expensive one), but I wonder how many things that are contraband (e.g. an eighth ounce of pot, Cuban cigars, bootleg movies bought overseas, etc.) or just embarrassing (hardcore fetish porn, nude pics, etc.) get lifted by unscrupulous agents who know that the person will be unlikely to report it unless they're stupid or have really thick skin.

I'm sure it happens- not even maligning TSA agents in particular, it's just that theft happens on all jobs where people have access to valuables- but I wonder how often. Also I wonder what precautions are in place to protect TSA and other agencies from people saying "I had my great-grandma's 20 carat emerald necklace in my suitcase and now it's gone".

[Terraplane]

I don't. Apparently vBulletin does.

Gotcha, just thought it was odd.

I would be amazed too - I don't defend it. I think they deserve to be fired but the blogger says she didn't ever intend for them to be. And she only wanted to draw attention to the larger, generic TSA not the screener. If all discrete and normal means of complaint failed, then I could understand taking it to the blog but doing that first, and later claiming her intention was never to get anyone in trouble is ingenuous or stupid.

It doesn't matter to me what her motives were. If she really didn't care and wasn't offended and spread the story just for attention/blog hits, fine. What she did will help the next person who may have been too shy or humiliated to retaliate.

[Lamia]

A bit off topic, but I've wondered how many five-finger-confiscations go on in airports and other places where people are allowed to search others belongings. Few women would probably be too embarrassed to report a missing vibrator (particularly if it was an expensive one)This happened to a friend of mine in college, and she was indeed too embarrassed to report it. I think a big part of the embarrassment was due not to TSA itself, but the risk that a complaint would result in her very, very psycho mother finding out that my friend owned a vibrator in the first place.
Also I wonder what precautions are in place to protect TSA and other agencies from people saying "I had my great-grandma's 20 carat emerald necklace in my suitcase and now it's gone".I'm not immediately finding anything about it on Google, but I remember years ago -- before 9/11 -- a baggage handler stole some diamond jewelry that turned out to be incredible valuable and in fact belonged to Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York. The jewelry was recovered, and IIRC the thief hadn't realized what he was getting himself into -- he'd thought he had just a fairly ordinary fancy necklace or whatever until the story broke.

[kidchameleon]

You know who else was "just doing his job?"

Goebbels.

Wasn't he the guy that founded Turkey?

[JoelUpchurch]

Well, this isn't the issue at all, but thanks for sharing your prudishness. Sex is a natural, biological inclination and many, many people have few if any hang-ups about enjoying it. If it comforts you, please continue to assume that women have zero interest in sex outside of procreation and the vibrator in question was for her achy back. Feel better?

The agent's opinion of the blogger's extracurricular activities was about as welcome and relevant as yours. Policy was violated; job terminated. End of story.

I'm enjoying your response. What you describe as prudery is what I would describe as a basic survival skill. I've known guys who discussed their natural biological inclinations at work and ended up getting canned. Most people recognize boundaries in what types of private behavior they talk about.

[11811]

Same agency which promised discretion when given the power to see through our clothes? Same agency trusted with patting our privates, and going through our personal items?

Inappropriate, unprofessional, indiscrete, creepy, and jerkish behavior. The agent was totally out of line. And the OP shows an equal degree of cluelessness.

We have a winner.

[Lamia]

I'm enjoying your response. What you describe as prudery is what I would describe as a basic survival skill. I've known guys who discussed their natural biological inclinations at work and ended up getting canned. Most people recognize boundaries in what types of private behavior they talk about.Not this TSA agent, apparently. I see that you said you agreed with the firing, but I don't understand why you're so shocked that Ms. Filipovic dared speak up about the incident and (seemingly) less surprised that the agent left the note in the first place.

[Troppus]

I'm enjoying your response. What you describe as prudery is what I would describe as a basic survival skill. I've known guys who discussed their natural biological inclinations at work and ended up getting canned. Most people recognize boundaries in what types of private behavior they talk about.

This has got to be the most peculiar case of blaming the victim I've ever encountered.

Okay, so don't tell your co-workers about your marital aids. Jill, however, is a writer, and a lawyer, and is apparently mature enough to decide what she should and shouldn't blog about.

For contrast and comparison, please note that the TSA agent does not have the same on the job freedom as Jill to wax poetic about vibrators, hence the trouble.

[tumbleddown]

Just unpacked my suitcase and found this note from TSA. Guess they discovered a "personal item" in my bag. Wow. -- viewed 206625 times
So you're suggesting what? That Jill tweeted in order to get the attention, specifically, of big traffic driver blogs so that she'd be "forced" to write a full follow up which would then be picked up by the mainstream media because she needs traffic on a blog that has ads solely to pay for server costs. (Feministe is not her personal blog.) That would belie a lack of understanding, to say the least, of how Twitter works, just as a start.
I think they deserve to be fired but the blogger says she didn't ever intend for them to be. And she only wanted to draw attention to the larger, generic TSA not the screener. If all discrete and normal means of complaint failed, then I could understand taking it to the blog but doing that first, and later claiming her intention was never to get anyone in trouble is ingenuous or stupid.
The words you want are "discreet" and "disingenuous" to begin with. Secondly, and more importantly, why are you presuming a requirement that any complaint about the TSA go only to the TSA and not be made via Twitter (especially when the complaint is, in the main, mild) or by one's blog if they so choose?

[Eve]

My collection of nude Ernest Borgnine pictures is private; I surrender that privacy when I pack them for flight, but not for little notes thereafter, regardless of whether the notes show approbation, indifference, or dismay.
Say, I just got a stash of saucy Ethel Merman nudes; you wanna get together?

[Crazyhorse]

So you're suggesting what? That Jill tweeted in order to get the attention, specifically, of big traffic driver blogs so that she'd be "forced" to write a full follow up which would then be picked up by the mainstream media because she needs traffic on a blog that has ads solely to pay for server costs. (Feministe is not her personal blog.) That would belie a lack of understanding, to say the least, of how Twitter works, just as a start.

I'm suggesting that if she carries a silver bullet shaped vibrator in a checked bag on an airline it is guaranteed to draw attention. Furthermore that blogging about it is guaranteed to draw further attention. All over something that is outrageous because it is a violation of her privacy. I go on to stay that she could maintain her privacy and achieve exactly the same result, or better, by simply following the normal process of filing her complaint, discreetly via the normal channels and getting the situation remedied. By immediately taking it public it would seem her hope was to gain publicity, yes, and/or evoke swift punishment for the agent which she says was not her goal.

The words you want are "discreet" and "disingenuous" to begin with. Secondly, and more importantly, why are you presuming a requirement that any complaint about the TSA go only to the TSA and not be made via Twitter (especially when the complaint is, in the main, mild) or by one's blog if they so choose?

I'm not presuming it is a requirement, only that it is advised if discretion and protection of one's privacy were the goal. Thanks for the spelling tips but I didn't type them that way - something is going on with all my posts today, making auto spelling corrections and adding font and size tags that I didn't select prior to posting.

[Troppus]

I'm suggesting that if she carries a silver bullet shaped vibrator in a checked bag on an airline it is guaranteed to draw attention. Furthermore that blogging about it is guaranteed to draw further attention. All over something that is outrageous because it is a violation of her privacy. I go on to stay that she could maintain her privacy and achieve exactly the same result, or better, by simply following the normal process of filing her complaint, discreetly via the normal channels and getting the situation remedied. By immediately taking it public it would seem her hope was to gain publicity, yes, and/or evoke swift punishment for the agent which she says was not her goal.



Good god. Do you understand that the TSA has a zero tolerance policy on harassment? That the agent would have been in trouble whether she phoned in the complaint, faxed a copy of the unwanted note, wrote a formal letter, or blogged? The fact of the blog is not relevant to the TSA rule that was broken.

[Lanzy]

One note found by a private person doesn't appear to be what is happening out there. I think it is something a lot of TSA agents are doing, the sooner this is stopped the happier I will be. Fire any TSA agent found doing this even once. Look for bombs not my stuff, asshats.

[Crazyhorse]

Good god. Do you understand that the TSA has a zero tolerance policy on harassment? That the agent would have been in trouble whether she phoned in the complaint, faxed a copy of the unwanted note, wrote a formal letter, or blogged? The fact of the blog is not relevant to the TSA rule that was broken.

So let's say he would be insta-fired either way, and they would do nothing to change their own policy, training, hiring requirements, etc., either way. Even so the only difference between the two approaches is publicity. I never implied that it wasn't a violation of TSA rules nor that he shouldn't have been fired. (or is it She? some refer to the note writer as female). The screener may have been fired for it either way, but it is still disingenuous or stupid to claim that she didn't want that to happen despite blogging it instead of just contacting the TSA about it.

Now her name is associated with the vibrator story all over the place - jokes, speculation and general chatter about her personal sex toys are fair game to the entire public instead of one rule-breaking TSA screener and their managers. She's clearly internet savvy enough to know that would be the case, and that the agent would be fired, from the very first tweet.

[Kobal2]

"Drive until you hit the ocean" is always a good plan. -- viewed 630 times

Just paid five euro to look at this statue of a goat. Tourism! -- viewed 720 times

Getting my Joyce on. -- viewed 1620 times

Just unpacked my suitcase and found this note from TSA. Guess they discovered a "personal item" in my bag. Wow. -- viewed 206625 times

I'm sorry, is it your contention that as she posted the note, she a) foresaw that the story would go viral and b) expecting this, was all *smugface* "That'll show him" as she typed ?

By immediately taking it public it would seem her hope was to gain publicity, yes, and/or evoke swift punishment for the agent which she says was not her goal.


Sweet Lord, it is.
You've never even been in the general vicinity of a person running a blog, have you ?

[Crazyhorse]

I'm sorry, is it your contention that as she posted the note, she a) foresaw that the story would go viral and b) expecting this, was all *smugface* "That'll show him" as she typed ?

a) yes. b) there is no way to know. But after the fact saying that her wish wasn't to get anyone in trouble indicates insincerity. Or she is the one who has no clue about how blogs and social networking work.

Sweet Lord, it is.
You've never even been in the general vicinity of a person running a blog, have you ?

Not if I see them first. But on occasion I have, even working in the same office as a fairly well known one. And we are all in the vicinity of bloggers works by being on the internet. Is it your contention that bloggers, and blogging by it's very nature, are not often directly based on attention whoring, traffic driving, and ad revenue?

[The Tao's Revenge]

Okay this thread is beyond retarded. Some jackass creeper riffles through someone's personal things, and then leaves commentary.

Whatever the reasons the woman posted about it are irrelevant. She shouldn't have been given this to post about in the first place. I'm glad she did.


Makes you think about what other creepy things they could be doing. When I take a plane I'm planing on having a suit case with:



A picture of a woman who vaguely (but not definitively) looks pregnant
a pregnancy test
a single coat hanger



Might as well give them something to talk about.

[tumbleddown]

I'm suggesting that if she carries a silver bullet shaped vibrator in a checked bag on an airline it is guaranteed to draw attention.
Only because we're a nation of people with ridiculous sexual hangups. How dare a woman carry a sex toy with her when she travels, oh no! :rolleyes:
Furthermore that blogging about it is guaranteed to draw further attention.
Which happened after the tweet blew up and people demanded more of the story. (The ability to foresee that a tweet will go viral to that level is 1 in 17 gazibillion.)
All over something that is outrageous because it is a violation of her privacy.
No, all over something that is outrageous because it was a violation of the understood professional social contract between the public and the TSA. That it's shorthanded as being about "privacy" is not really indicative of the whole story.

We know they're invading our privacy, even if we're not carrying sex toys or anything else that's especially revelatory. And that's something that we accept -- begrudgingly in some cases, but still we do accept -- as the unfortunate required condition of flying in this country.

But we require, in exchange for trusting the TSA with this level of personal information about and interaction with us that they maintain firm professional boundaries with us and the information. There are strongly delineated lines of propriety that we demand for our peace of mind, and that the agency requires as a modicum of professionalism.

The problem wasn't that the agent invaded her privacy, it was that the agent abused her power by making an inappropriate and invasive comment that could only be made because of the ability to rifle through Jill's belongings. And Jill said as much, within six hours of the initial tweet that began it all, Jill said, in an email with a web magazine about the issue“The fact that TSA rifles through our personal items isn't a secret, but it's also something most of us don't particularly want to think about (http://www.dailydot.com/news/tsa-jill-filipovic-vibrator-note-freak-on/),” she wrote. “The fact that they would leave a note takes it to another level of invasive—especially since I imagine they assumed I'd be embarrassed by their discovery.”
It's not about "discretion" about her ownership of a vibrator. She's never been secretive about the fact that she has vibrators, she's talked openly on the blog in the past about problems she had with a super who got too nosey in her drawers when he came into her apartment to do work. She's talked openly in the past on the blog about supporting feminist sex toy stores like Babeland -- whose management tweeted to offer her a fresh new vibe within a couple of hours of the initial tweet, so the "personal item" in question was never really a secret, it was clear from the get go.

You also seem to think that she was embarrassed by owning a vibrator, or ought to be, like the TSA agent, trying to capitalize on a shame that just doesn't exist. Without it, your argument falls apart.
a) yes. b) there is no way to know. But after the fact saying that her wish wasn't to get anyone in trouble indicates insincerity. Or she is the one who has no clue about how blogs and social networking work.
Yes, because it's entirely possible to predict what the TSA, a huge and largely unaccountable federal agency whose "highly trained and skilled" staffers have ripped medical devices out of people's bodies without so much as an apology, will choose to do with an allegation made via Twitter.

Clearly with her magic psychic powers she knew that they'd talk about this on Fox News and The View and the TSA would be forced to act.

[Crazyhorse]

Only because we're a nation of people with ridiculous sexual hangups. How dare a woman carry a sex toy with her when she travels, oh no! :rolleyes:


Not because it is a vibrator, Einstein, it is guaranteed to draw attention because it is a silver, metallic, bullet shaped vibrator. (which unsurprisingly is linked from one of the links in the OP where it is available for sale). Having an ammunition-shaped object in your bag is like sending a homemade cake into a prison and finding a note that says "No hacksaw found here, bake on Baker!" Totally inappropriate for the note to be written at all, as are the others that have been cited in this thread but for all we know the note writer might have been a female fan, just echoing something she wrote on her own blog at some time not making a comment on the sexual nature per se.

It is inappropriate to make any comment at all during what should be a sterile, mechanical search for specific contraband and nothing more. I haven't disagreed with that by pointing out all she needed to do in order to right the wrong was report the incident. I think she saw this as an opportunity. That doesn't have to mean it wasn't also a legitimate complaint, nor that the screener didn't deserve to be fired.

[The Tao's Revenge]

Not because it is a vibrator, Einstein, it is guaranteed to draw attention because it is a silver, metallic, bullet shaped vibrator.

There you have it folks. She had a terrorist dildo.

[Crazyhorse]

There you have it folks. She had a terrorist dildo.

A weapon of mass stress reduction.

[Lamia]

It is inappropriate to make any comment at all during what should be a sterile, mechanical search for specific contraband and nothing more. I haven't disagreed with that by pointing out all she needed to do in order to right the wrong was report the incident. I think she saw this as an opportunity. That doesn't have to mean it wasn't also a legitimate complaint, nor that the screener didn't deserve to be fired.What is your problem, then? Are you really just worked up that a blogger dared to blog about something? As long as Ms. Filipovic was telling the truth -- and I've seen no indication that she wasn't -- then she had every right to speak/tweet/blog about this incident.

[runner pat]

A weapon of mass stress reduction.

Bravo!

[Crazyhorse]

What is your problem, then? Are you really just worked up that a blogger dared to blog about something? As long as Ms. Filipovic was telling the truth -- and I've seen no indication that she wasn't -- then she had every right to speak/tweet/blog about this incident.

Try to keep up. My problem such as it were is that she says she never intended for it to become a big story or get anyone at the TSA in trouble and I say she did intend for it to become a big story and didn't care if it got anyone at the TSA in trouble. I never said she was outside of her rights so I agree. Otherwise, no problem. What's yours?

[Lamia]

Try to keep up. My problem such as it were is that she says she never intended for it to become a big story or get anyone at the TSA in trouble and I say she did intend for it to become a big story and didn't care if it got anyone at the TSA in trouble.Why on earth would she lie about that? I'd never heard of Ms. Filipovic before this incident, but unless she has some established reputation for dishonesty then I see no reason not to take her at her word on this. I wouldn't have expected the TSA agent to be fired if I were in Ms. Filipovic's place (if nothing else it seems like it would be easy for the agent to claim someone else had written the note), although unlike her I wouldn't be broken up about it either.
I never said she was outside of her rights so I agree. Otherwise, no problem. What's yours?I have a general problem with victim-blaming, and I don't like your repeated suggestions that Ms. Filipovic was the one who should have been more "discreet" in this situation. She didn't do anything wrong. The person who left an inappropriate note in her luggage did.

[The Tao's Revenge]

Why on earth would she lie about that? I'd never heard of Ms. Filipovic before this incident, but unless she has some established reputation for dishonesty then I see no reason not to take her at her word on this. I wouldn't have expected the TSA agent to be fired if I were in Ms. Filipovic's place (if nothing else it seems like it would be easy for the agent to claim someone else had written the note), although unlike her I wouldn't be broken up about it either.
I have a general problem with victim-blaming, and I don't like your repeated suggestions that Ms. Filipovic was the one who should have been more "discreet" in this situation. She didn't do anything wrong. The person who left an inappropriate note in her luggage did.

This exactly.

[Crazyhorse]

I have a general problem with victim-blaming, and I don't like your repeated suggestions that Ms. Filipovic was the one who should have been more "discreet" in this situation. She didn't do anything wrong. The person who left an inappropriate note in her luggage did.

It's not blaming the victim of a genuine inappropriate action by the TSA here to add a side note that she is capitalizing on the experience, and far from appearing to be a stunned victim, she is amused and just slightly annoyed. People always say they never intended for something to go viral when it does.

It also isn't blaming the victim to say that packing any bullet-shaped, metallic object in a checked bag is going to draw scrutiny and it has nothing to do with it being a vibrator. That doesn't mean it was appropriate in any way to put a personal note in her bag once it turned out to just be a vibrator. She is clearly not at all upset or embarrassed about the nature of the device itself being discovered, nor any invasion of privacy because that is a given in the world of air travel. Just that the agent, somewhat creepily, made a point to let her know they saw the device even if in an approving way, and she is right to complain about it. I think you may be taking my comments to mean support for the OP's position, which they are not.

[Lamia]

It's not blaming the victim of a genuine inappropriate action by the TSA here to add a side note that she is capitalizing on the experience,So what if she is? I'm not familiar with Jill Filipovic's blogging or other writing, but much of it is presumably based on her own experiences. Why shouldn't this particular experience be more grist for the mill?
and far from appearing to be a stunned victim, she is amused and just slightly annoyed.That seems like a perfectly appropriate reaction to me. If I were in her place I hope I'd be able to see the humor in the situation.
People always say they never intended for something to go viral when it does.And many of them are telling the truth. No one can accurately predict what things will go viral, some people have had embarrassing things go viral against their wishes (like that Star Wars kid), and plenty of people have tried and failed to get something to go viral.

[Crazyhorse]

So what if she is?

This is The Pit. I'm entitled to find fault in the TSA, the victim, and the OP, without having to qualify my observations with a reason. I'm not posting with an agenda or trying to accomplish anything.

[Kobal2]

a) yes.

You are a blithering idiot. Nobody knows what's going viral or when. There are entire schools of marketing dedicated to trying to figure it out, and for the most part they're failing miserably.
Furthermore, if Ms. Filipovic had the uncanny ability to know in advance what is going to generate 200.000+ spikes of viewers on her blog and influence large national organizations, one would expect her to use this magical ability of hers every day and to flumox every organization on her shitlist, yes ? Or is it a monthly ritual, perhaps ? Was it granted by a mysterious being who'll yank it away should she ever use her powerful abilities for Eeeevil ?

b) there is no way to know. But after the fact saying that her wish wasn't to get anyone in trouble indicates insincerity.

How the hell does it ? She noted something on her blog, presumably without any hope of achieving anything more than a couple dozen "Yeah, the TSA are assholes" comments from her fans. When it went further, she had an "oops" moment. Injecting any nefarious or insicere sentiments in this fairly banal sequence of events says more about you than her, I think.

Or she is the one who has no clue about how blogs and social networking work.

:rolleyes:

Not if I see them first. But on occasion I have, even working in the same office as a fairly well known one. And we are all in the vicinity of bloggers works by being on the internet. Is it your contention that bloggers, and blogging by it's very nature, are not often directly based on attention whoring, traffic driving, and ad revenue?

Attention whoring ? I guess so, to the extent that any form of expression or art is attention whoring. Do you reckon writing a newspaper column, or publishing a book, or posting on this very board is primarily motivated by attention whoring ?

As for traffic and ad revenue being a basis for hosting a blog, yeah, you have fuck all understanding of the blogger mentality. Nobody gets into this thinking they'll get super famous and make $$$ in their spare time - or if they do, they don't last long. For the most part internet ads barely cover the cost of a running a large website. Know why ? Because in the history of the Internet nobody has ever clicked on an internet ad, ever. Hell, thanks to AdBlock, these days 90% of surfers don't even see them.

[Kobal2]

People always say they never intended for something to go viral when it does.

And... what ? They're all lying liars ?

[Crazyhorse]

You are a blithering idiot. Nobody knows what's going viral or when. There are entire schools of marketing dedicated to trying to figure it out, and for the most part they're failing miserably.

You are a raging imbecile. Hoping that it goes viral, and posting to get traffic does not imply an absolute advance knowledge of exactly how popular it will ultimately be. In the case of a juicy TSA story, happening to an already known blogger, and involving a personal sex toy, this was a shoe-in. Your statements of disbelief that she could ever imagine the story would go viral either betray your utter, jaw-dropping ignorance or an insincere stance to troll something you can't possibly believe is true.

Furthermore, if Ms. Filipovic had the uncanny ability to know in advance what is going to generate 200.000+ spikes of viewers on her blog and influence large national organizations, one would expect her to use this magical ability of hers every day and to flumox every organization on her shitlist, yes ? Or is it a monthly ritual, perhaps ? Was it granted by a mysterious being who'll yank it away should she ever use her powerful abilities for Eeeevil ?

I can't really help your inability to comprehend what you read, you're making the incorrect interpretation that the statement meant she could predict exactly the number of hits she would get. That isn't what was said or implied. I quoted the number of hits that she did get, in answer to someone saying that blog didn't add any significant traffic to her already very popular site - which was utter bullshit, it gets over 200 times the traffic of the next most popular entry.

Attention whoring ? I guess so, to the extent that any form of expression or art is attention whoring. Do you reckon writing a newspaper column, or publishing a book, or posting on this very board is primarily motivated by attention whoring ?

Wow, you really must not read many blogs.

As for traffic and ad revenue being a basis for hosting a blog, yeah, you have fuck all understanding of the blogger mentality. Nobody gets into this thinking they'll get super famous and make $$$ in their spare time - or if they do, they don't last long. For the most part internet ads barely cover the cost of a running a large website. Know why ? Because in the history of the Internet nobody has ever clicked on an internet ad, ever. Hell, thanks to AdBlock, these days 90% of surfers don't even see them.

You apparently have fuck all understanding of what I wrote. Where did I say she got into blogging to get rich quick or relies solely on ad revenue to exist? She has a career outside of blogging but she gains fame, marketability and a number of other benefits from generating viral traffic to her blog not just ad revenue. I also said she is attention whoring a hot button issue of TSA and their invasive practices, etc. to get blog hits not trying to right a wrong at the TSA, and said herself she died laughing and didn't want anyone to get in trouble. Yet she is continuing to blog about it even as she says she doesn't want the publicity anymore, and doing things like naming new blogs "Getting My Joyce On", etc. in an homage to the fame-grabbing entry she clearly doesn't want forgotten.

[Inner Stickler]

Limpdick, what if they had opened your bag found a condom and left a note that said "too small for Magnums, huh?" Or they had found some lotion/lubricant and left a note saying, "have fun, gayboy."
These are both obvious slams against a person. I have a hard time seeing how "get your freak on," could be read as meaning anything other than grrl power embrace your sexuality stuff.

In my opinion, it's a cute note left by a well-meaning agent. People who get upset about that have a stick up their ass and not the fun vibrating kind either. I'm sorry if thinking the world could do with a little more sex and a little less job terminations is wrong.

If you don't want to be called a cunt, don't act like one. And if being called a cunt upsets you, then don't ever call someone a dick, prick, ass, asshole, boob, or pussy.

[Troppus]

Crazyhorse, the TSA blogged about the incident here: http://blog.tsa.gov/2011/10/inappropriate-note-author-identified.html

Does the presence of the TSA blog entry about the same incident reinforce or negate your argument?

[Crazyhorse]

Crazyhorse, the TSA blogged about the incident here: http://blog.tsa.gov/2011/10/inappropriate-note-author-identified.html

Does the presence of the TSA blog entry about the same incident reinforce or negate your argument?

Neither. The TSA blog is a one-directional announcement system paid for by taxpayers and written by anonymous authors who are employees of the TSA. They aren't attention whoring or selling vibrators, books or ads. they are trying to head off thousands of calls and emails about it by posting an official statement and answering the question one time for everyone.

[Troppus]

Neither. The TSA blog is a one-directional announcement system paid for by taxpayers and written by anonymous authors who are employees of the TSA. They aren't attention whoring or selling vibrators, books or ads. they are trying to head off thousands of calls and emails about it by posting an official statement and answering the question one time for everyone.

Could have been left off the blog and treated as an internal, private matter, though, right? I mean, if you expected Jill, an author and blogger to keep this experience to herself, TSA should have shown the same discretion.

But they didn't, so both entities break even, right?

[Crazyhorse]

Could have been blogged and treated as an internal, private matter, though, right? I mean, if you expected Jill, an author and blogger to keep this experience to herself, TSA should have shown the same discretion.

But they didn't, so both entities break even, right?

I didn't expect her to do anything. I expressed disbelief that she had no idea the story would generate so much publicity, and that if her wish wasn't to cause a lot of publicity or get anyone fired, posting photos of the note on Twitter and a popular blog was a very unusual way to show it. The TSA wouldn't have blogged it if it was an internal, private matter. I'm not sure how something 'could have been blogged and treated as a private, internal matter'. If she came to them directly, filed a complaint and they investigated and took action, I'm not at all sure they would blog it but if they did it would be to show transparency, full disclosure, etc. not to generate publicity for the TSA.

[Troppus]

These are both obvious slams against a person. I have a hard time seeing how "get your freak on," could be read as meaning anything other than grrl power embrace your sexuality stuff.

In my opinion, it's a cute note left by a well-meaning agent. People who get upset about that have a stick up their ass and not the fun vibrating kind either. I'm sorry if thinking the world could do with a little more sex and a little less job terminations is wrong.

If you don't want to be called a cunt, don't act like one. And if being called a cunt upsets you, then don't ever call someone a dick, prick, ass, asshole, boob, or pussy.

The agent displayed a lack of discretion, a lack of professionalism, and broke a very clearly stated rule about harassment.

Jill's initial blog entry consisted of two sentences and a photo of the note:

"This is what TSA will do when they inspect a bag you checked and find a, um, “personal item”: (photo)

Total violation of privacy, wildly inappropriate and clearly not ok, but I also just died laughing in my hotel room."

How in your estimation does this brief entry make Jill a cunt?

[Uzi]

It's not like he wanked on her clothes or something...

Being a paranoid type, I don't leave my toothbrush by the sink at a hotel when I leave my room for the maid to wash the toilet or their ass with (I seem to remember a video of same some years ago).
So, the inappropriate note was left and you assume that was all there was to it. Good on ya for being so trusting. Me, I'd throw the vibrator (assuming I'd ever own one) out at the least. No telling where it was while the person took the time to write the note. :o or :eek:

[Troppus]

I didn't expect her to do anything. I expressed disbelief that she had no idea the story would generate so much publicity, and that if her wish wasn't to cause a lot of publicity or get anyone fired, posting photos of the note on Twitter and a popular blog was a very unusual way to show it. The TSA wouldn't have blogged it if it was an internal, private matter. I'm not sure how something 'could have been blogged and treated as a private, internal matter'. If she came to them directly, filed a complaint and they investigated and took action, I'm not at all sure they would blog it but if they did it would be to show transparency, full disclosure, etc. not to generate publicity for the TSA.


Okay, I'm going to call this sideline discussion a break-even, because I can't in good faith state exactly what Jill's motives were when she posted a peculiar travel experience and also be "sure the TSA blogged solely to show transparency, full disclosure, etc, and not to generate publicity for the TSA."

Since you seem to have inside information about the motives of each party, you are clearly in a better place to make a value judgment about each actor. I'm out.

[Inner Stickler]

The agent displayed a lack of discretion, a lack of professionalism, and broke a very clearly stated rule about harassment.

Jill's initial blog entry consisted of two sentences and a photo of the note:

"This is what TSA will do when they inspect a bag you checked and find a, um, “personal item”: (photo)

Total violation of privacy, wildly inappropriate and clearly not ok, but I also just died laughing in my hotel room."

How in your estimation does this brief entry make Jill a cunt?I was thinking more about the people throwing hissy fits about cunt in this thread. I've never sent a vibrator through the airport but I have traveled via airlines, and honestly, I can't really imagine getting that upset about it. I mean, take my underwear and Uzi's post about being paranoid. I don't need a note to suspect that a TSA agent wanked in my undies. In fact, it's more likely in my mind that a TSA agent has time to wank in them or time to write a note but not both. So, really any time I don't get a TSA note, I should probably just toss my undies to be safe. Or, I could not be a dillhole about the whole thing and understand that flying via air means people will be looking through my suitcase. Your mileage may vary and that's fine but I probably won't be sitting next to you on the suspicious train to paranoiaville, if only because if I open that door in my head, I'll never get anything done ever again.

And Uzi, I saw a movie once where a fry cook rubbed a hamburger patty on his crotch. I still eat at restaurants.

[Crazyhorse]

Being a paranoid type, I don't leave my toothbrush by the sink at a hotel when I leave my room for the maid to wash the toilet or their ass with (I seem to remember a video of same some years ago).
So, the inappropriate note was left and you assume that was all there was to it. Good on ya for being so trusting. Me, I'd throw the vibrator (assuming I'd ever own one) out at the least. No telling where it was while the person took the time to write the note. :o or :eek:

She's one step ahead of you. At least according to Perez Hilton (http://perezhilton.com/2011-10-25-tsa-leaves-woman-note-after-discovering-her-vibrator-in-luggage) (another socially conscious and not-in-it-for-the-fame-whoring blogger who gives a damn)

“Total violation of privacy, wildly inappropriate and clearly not ok, but I also just died laughing in my hotel room. Yes, the vibe was still there. No theft, but I’m unsure if they handled it? Given that uncertainty, it’s definitely being retired.”

[anya marie]

This should have been covered in TSA training, and I'm only a bit sorry that someone is out of a job but they should have known better and that was a very unprofessional note. They have laid their head on the chopping block of their own accord. If I found a note like that I'd have told people and shown it to them. So, from one raging cunt to another, good work.

It's all so Beavis and Butthead "huh huh huh vibrator ha ha."

If you tip the housekeeper that would remove temptation to clean the toilet with your toothbrush. Don't be a dick to the housekeeper. Don't leave notes when you find someones vibrator.

[Miller]

Bolding mine.
OP - you're the cunt.


Jeffrey - or may I call you Dude? - anyway, calling other posters "cunts" is against the rules in the Pit. Please don't do this in the future.

No warning issued.

[Uzi]

And Uzi, I saw a movie once where a fry cook rubbed a hamburger patty on his crotch. I still eat at restaurants.

So do I. You can't worry about everything. Yet, if I found a note in my hamburger saying, "Bon appetite", I'd be inclined not to eat it. The hamburger that is, not the note.
And I still travel on planes. But then my toothbrush is in my carry-on along with most of my other personal affects.

[The Other Jeffrey Lebowski]

Jeffrey - or may I call you Dude? - anyway, calling other posters "cunts" is against the rules in the Pit. Please don't do this in the future.

No warning issued.


Thank you for the heads up, Miller, my apologies.

[Kobal2]

You are a raging imbecile. Hoping that it goes viral, and posting to get traffic does not imply an absolute advance knowledge of exactly how popular it will ultimately be.

I get grossed out picturing your keyboard. That poor thing must be positively soaked in drool.

I asked you if you thought she knew her story would go viral, to which you answered yes. Nowhere did you mention hope, or trying to.
Which of course she didn't anyway, unless you consider that posting a one line story, not cross-posting it anywhere else but on her personnal twitter which has a relatively small following (seriously. 700 is a tiny, tiny niche), and writing nothing inflammatory whatsoever is "trying to get viral".
In which case you're probably drowning as I write.

In the case of a juicy TSA story, happening to an already known blogger, and involving a personal sex toy, this was a shoe-in.

Right. Seriously man, how do you even manage to type ? Don't you get shocks or cause shorts or something ?

I can't really help your inability to comprehend what you read, you're making the incorrect interpretation that the statement meant she could predict exactly the number of hits she would get.

Again, that's what you said. Whether or not that's what you meant to say is another matter.

That isn't what was said or implied. I quoted the number of hits that she did get, in answer to someone saying that blog didn't add any significant traffic to her already very popular site - which was utter bullshit, it gets over 200 times the traffic of the next most popular entry.

~1000 reads on the most popular post is not "very popular". And you *still* answered to me that she knew her story would generate so many hits - in fact you're still saying it with your shoe-in nonsense. If it was such a sure thing, and she knew such stories would be a sure fame/revenue stream, AND she was the attention whore you try and smear her as, wouldn't she post such stories all the time ?

Or could it just be that she's just a fucking blogger to whom something quite out of the ordinary happened, which she would e.g. be inclined to put up on her fucking blog ? You know, the place where people write up (or make up) the notable things happening in their lives ?

Wow, you really must not read many blogs.

Wrote one, dude. Wrote one.

You apparently have fuck all understanding of what I wrote. Where did I say she got into blogging to get rich quick or relies solely on ad revenue to exist?

Again with the drool. You said attention whoring, fame and ad revenue were the base motivations behind blogging in general.

She has a career outside of blogging but she gains fame, marketability and a number of other benefits from generating viral traffic to her blog not just ad revenue.

I'm sure she does. You still have to demonstrate that's what she set out to do.

I also said she is attention whoring a hot button issue of TSA and their invasive practices, etc. to get blog hits not trying to right a wrong at the TSA, and said herself she died laughing and didn't want anyone to get in trouble. Yet she is continuing to blog about it even as she says she doesn't want the publicity anymore,

Of *course* she's still writing about it, she's still a fucking blogger isn't she ? And this concerns her blog, doesn't it ? Again, have you ever even met one ?! Or are you just this obtuse, wilfully or not ?
The event is even more out of the ordinary and notable now that it has become a News Item. Why would she not comment on that, address her surpising spike of fame ? What would you have her do, tear down her blog, change her name and join a convent ?

and doing things like naming new blogs "Getting My Joyce On", etc. in an homage to the fame-grabbing entry she clearly doesn't want forgotten.

There's not enough :rolleyes: in the world for you. I mean it.

[Bricker]

Say, I just got a stash of saucy Ethel Merman nudes; you wanna get together?

Are you kidding? A match made in heaven!

[Darth Panda]

So, if the news headline had been

"TSA approves of agents leaving notes commenting on the sexual habits of passengers based on their luggage content."

This would have been OK? I just don't see how it could have worked out like that. A lot more than 1 person would have lost their job if that had happened.

[Sampiro]

Are you kidding? A match made in heaven!

Only for a few days though.

[JoelUpchurch]

Not this TSA agent, apparently. I see that you said you agreed with the firing, but I don't understand why you're so shocked that Ms. Filipovic dared speak up about the incident and (seemingly) less surprised that the agent left the note in the first place.

If you had followed what I had posted before about TSA on the SDMB, it would be clear that my default assumption about TSA employees is that they are idiots, so I wasn't surprised that a woman at TSA would leave a note like that. I would expect an attorney to file a complaint with the TSA first instead of discussing it on her blog and reserving the publicity option if she got an unsatisfactory response. I'm sure many attorneys have active sex lives, but discussing it publicly doesn't sound like behavior that would put you on fast track to partner.

[Lamia]

If you had followed what I had posted before about TSA on the SDMB, it would be clear that my default assumption about TSA employees is that they are idiots, so I wasn't surprised that a woman at TSA would leave a note like that.You're not the first person in this thread to refer to the TSA agent as being a woman. None of the news stories I've seen indicate that this is the case though, and it appears that the TSA agent's identity has not been made public. Does someone have a cite indicating that the agent responsible was female?
I would expect an attorney to file a complaint with the TSA first instead of discussing it on her blog and reserving the publicity option if she got an unsatisfactory response. I'm sure many attorneys have active sex lives, but discussing it publicly doesn't sound like behavior that would put you on fast track to partner.I'm unfamiliar with Ms. Filipovic's blogging history, but tumbledown mentioned upthread that Ms. Filipovic has posted about vibrators there before. If that kind of thing is going to endanger her career then the damage had already been done before this incident.

[Troppus]

If you had followed what I had posted before about TSA on the SDMB, it would be clear that my default assumption about TSA employees is that they are idiots, so I wasn't surprised that a woman at TSA would leave a note like that. I would expect an attorney to file a complaint with the TSA first instead of discussing it on her blog and reserving the publicity option if she got an unsatisfactory response. I'm sure many attorneys have active sex lives, but discussing it publicly doesn't sound like behavior that would put you on fast track to partner.

Ah. So in your world, lawyers should be conservative and discrete in all matters.

But...who do you suppose represents the business owners in the state of Alabama who wish to sell marital aids? Defends a woman's right to purchase the morning after pill and other reproductive rights? Who helped strike the fornication law in Virginia in 2005? Who will defend a Hooter's waitress in a custody case? How long does this list of hypotheticals have to be in order to convince you that your world is very, very small and your definitions of acceptable behavior need not apply to all.

Snippet of Jill Flipovic's resume from Huffington Post: "Jill...hopes to eventually pursue a career in international human rights, focusing on women's issues and access to reproductive health care." Here is a link to her published works from the Feministe website. (http://www.feministe.us/blog/about-this-website/about-jill/) Seems to me Jill's writings are in keeping with her experience, career goals, and personal agenda. Besides... I doubt Jill requires your approval to discuss matters you consider risque.

[PlainJain]

It also isn't blaming the victim to say that packing any bullet-shaped, metallic object in a checked bag is going to draw scrutiny and it has nothing to do with it being a vibrator.
Speaking of bullet-headed dildos...

[Crazyhorse]

Speaking of bullet-headed dildos...

Wow, zinger! Nice one Jain. Sale on Vodka this week or did you have anything specific to say about why you disagree? The statement you quoted is about the only uncontentious and obvious point out of the many you could bitch about, if you actually had anything coherent to say.

[JoelUpchurch]

You're not the first person in this thread to refer to the TSA agent as being a woman. None of the news stories I've seen indicate that this is the case though, and it appears that the TSA agent's identity has not been made public.

Maybe you can correct me on American vernacular, but doesn't the use of the word "girl" in the term, “Get Your Freak On, Girl.” usually designate a female to female type address similar to the phase "You go Girl".

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=you%20go%20girl

It would also be reasonable that people doing the checked baggage inspection will be the most junior and lowest paid, so given the allegations of sexual discrimination at the TSA would have a much higher percentage of female employees doing those jobs.

[code_grey]

we need more raging cunts! We need more raging cunts!

It serves the TSA as..les just right.

[JoelUpchurch]

Ah. So in your world, lawyers should be conservative and discrete in all matters.

I don't about conservative, but Lawyers are supposed to be discrete.

But...who do you suppose represents the business owners in the state of Alabama who wish to sell marital aids? Defends a woman's right to purchase the morning after pill and other reproductive rights? Who helped strike the fornication law in Virginia in 2005? Who will defend a Hooter's waitress in a custody case? How long does this list of hypotheticals have to be in order to convince you that your world is very, very small and your definitions of acceptable behavior need not apply to all.

You seem to have some sort of weird idea that lawyers are required to use or approve of their clients products.

Snippet of Jill Flipovic's resume from Huffington Post: "Jill...hopes to eventually pursue a career in international human rights, focusing on women's issues and access to reproductive health care." Here is a link to her published works from the Feministe website. (http://www.feministe.us/blog/about-this-website/about-jill/) Seems to me Jill's writings are in keeping with her experience, career goals, and personal agenda. Besides... I doubt Jill requires your approval to discuss matters you consider risque.

In what Universe, does her aspirations prove she is wise or even sane? You hear similar statements at every beauty pageant. We have people not aspiring, but actually running for President of the United States, that appear to be idiots.

[Lamia]

Maybe you can correct me on American vernacular, but doesn't the use of the word "girl" in the term, “Get Your Freak On, Girl.” usually designate a female to female type address similar to the phase "You go Girl".

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=you%20go%20girl

It would also be reasonable that people doing the checked baggage inspection will be the most junior and lowest paid, so given the allegations of sexual discrimination at the TSA would have a much higher percentage of female employees doing those jobs.I didn't ask for your speculations, I asked for a cite that the agent responsible for the note was a woman. As far as I can tell no identifying information about the agent has been released.

FWIW, the use of "girl" in this sense is stereotypically associated with both gay men and African-American women, but it's so hackneyed that I wouldn't take it as evidence of anything about the note-writer's sex, sexual orientation, or race. While I suppose it's within the realm of possibility that there's some Sassy Gay Guy or Sassy Black Gal working for TSA who sincerely wanted to encourage Ms. Flipovic to have fun, I think it's far more likely that the agent responsible for the note was just being snide.

[kaylasdad99]

Am I the only one who read the thread title and immediately thought of a female officer with a yeast infection, opportunistically "borrowing" a conveniently-shaped hairbrush from someone's bag?

Yeah, probably, I guess.

[brazil84]

I think the cunt was in the right to complain.

It's like the difference between a doctor who sees you naked and a doctor who watches you undress. We accept the first because it is necessary, but the second is completely unprofessional. From a logical perspective, there should not be a difference, but emotionally it makes a big difference.

So too with commenting on the contents of a person's travel bags. The TSA should ignore legal but embarrassing items just like a well trained butler. It's important to peoples' dignity to be able to pretend to themselves that they have some privacy.

[Troppus]

I don't about conservative, but Lawyers are supposed to be discrete.

You seem to have some sort of weird idea that lawyers are required to use or approve of their clients products.

In what Universe, does her aspirations prove she is wise or even sane? You hear similar statements at every beauty pageant. We have people not aspiring, but actually running for President of the United States, that appear to be idiots.

Umm... I don't know, perhaps Jill's apparent success and popularity? The list of achievements on her resume is certainly impressive. And now she has an extra dose of notoriety to pad her stats. I would label her disclosure rather prudent, considering her area of expertise and likely client base.

But hey, since you seem so concerned about the naive little ol' thing, why don't you post some of your priggish advice on her blog along with the other comments? She might just return the favor and advise you as to where to stash your uptight and outdated opinions.

[Steve MB]

My apololgies. I didn't realize that the BBQ pit was reserved for cases of genocide.

Well, at least now you know that it will not end well for you if you post a story that attempts to elicit sympathy for people who are, in fact, receiving the richly deserved fruits of their own stupidity. And knowing is half the battle....

[JoelUpchurch]

I didn't ask for your speculations, I asked for a cite that the agent responsible for the note was a woman. As far as I can tell no identifying information about the agent has been released.

I noticed you didn't see anything wrong when other posters referred to the TSA employee as "he".

FWIW, the use of "girl" in this sense is stereotypically associated with both gay men and African-American women, but it's so hackneyed that I wouldn't take it as evidence of anything about the note-writer's sex, sexual orientation, or race. While I suppose it's within the realm of possibility that there's some Sassy Gay Guy or Sassy Black Gal working for TSA who sincerely wanted to encourage Ms. Flipovic to have fun, I think it's far more likely that the agent responsible for the note was just being snide.

BTW, where are you getting this whole black/gay stuff from? Frankly you sound rather racist and homophobic.

I frankly think we will find out the identity of the TSA employee pretty soon. As near as I can tell, ,there are several hundred TSA employees working at Newark airport, which is too many too keep a secret.

[Lamia]

I noticed you didn't see anything wrong when other posters referred to the TSA employee as "he".I believe that is the traditional pronoun to use for an individual of unknown sex. I didn't notice anyone referring to the unknown agent as "a man", while you specifically said "a woman".

BTW, where are you getting this whole black/gay stuff from? Frankly you sound rather racist and homophobic.Well, that's what I get for trying to be helpful in The Pit. You're the one who asked me about the American usage of the word "girl", as in "You go, girl!" This expression is, in the US, stereotypically associated with both gay men and African-American women. The link to Urban Dictionary that you posted actually describes "You go, girl!" as "Network Television adaptation of gay/inner city jargon", so I'm not sure why you're shocked to hear basically the same thing from me.

I frankly think we will find out the identity of the TSA employee pretty soon. As near as I can tell, ,there are several hundred TSA employees working at Newark airport, which is too many too keep a secret.Is there some reason you can't just admit that you don't have a cite for the agent's sex? I asked, IMHO quite politely, for a cite that the agent was a woman since "a woman" was how you described this person -- a person who as far as I knew had not been publicly identified as either male or female. For all I know the agent in question is a woman, but in the absence of other evidence it's just as likely that the agent is a man.

[JoelUpchurch]

Umm... I don't know, perhaps Jill's apparent success and popularity?

After reading about what happened to MS Filipovic and other female law school students at autoadmit, I would think that she would agree that popularity is a very mixed blessing.

After reading about what happened at autoadmit, I think I'll change my signature to "prude and proud if it". There are some people around that I don't want to admit I share an Y chromosome with.

[Troppus]

After reading about what happened to MS Filipovic and other female law school students at autoadmit, I would think that she would agree that popularity is a very mixed blessing.

After reading about what happened at autoadmit, I think I'll change my signature to "prude and proud if it". There are some people around that I don't want to admit I share an Y chromosome with.

Wow. That's a sickening read. The negative comments on her blog seem positively menacing now.

I stand by my feelings about Jill's refreshing lack of prudishness, and I really can't see her blog entry as anything but a humerous anecdote that's been blown way out of proportion. But please forgive my nasty advice about posting your negative feelings on her blog; I'm quite sure you don't belong in that cesspool.

[tumbleddown]

I don't about conservative, but Lawyers are supposed to be discrete.
Discreet. For the love of all that's holy, people, learn the difference between these two damn words if you are going to use them.

Secondly, I know a ton of lawyers in private practice, working for corporations, the government, working in human services and for advocacy groups, pretty much all sorts of legal work, and I know most of them via their blogs, where they talk openly about their private lives and their personal beliefs. I've seen pictures of two of them half-naked, sitting in water with human effluvia floating around them. (i.e. pictures of them taken shortly after having water births.) I'm pretty sure your expectation of what constitutes appropriate "discretion" isn't universal or particularly realistic.

And since Jill doesn't work for a firm, she's the only one who gets to decide if she's revealing too much.
But please forgive my nasty advice about posting your negative feelings on her blog; I'm quite sure you don't belong in that cesspool.
Feministe is rarely a cesspool, until it's trolled assmonkeys who saw a link on Fox News or, when the AutoAdmit thing blew up, by all the douchebag dudebro sexist pigs who thought the AutoAdmit thing was funny and why did girls always have to harsh their squee.

[Frylock]

This exactly.

Well... It's not "victim blaming" to point out the tension between saying "I don't want anyone to be fired over this" and at the same time "here's an example of something that will clearly get someone fired."

I mean, the TSA employee wrote his own death sentence, so to speak. But it's seems just a little disingenuous to me to play the "I didn't mean it to come to this card" when you most clearly knew that it would certainly come to this.

[The Tao's Revenge]

Wow. That's a sickening read. The negative comments on her blog seem positively menacing now.

I stand by my feelings about Jill's refreshing lack of prudishness, and I really can't see her blog entry as anything but a humerous anecdote that's been blown way out of proportion. But please forgive my nasty advice about posting your negative feelings on her blog; I'm quite sure you don't belong in that cesspool.

The ones I read where kind of funny. Like the masturbation one
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/10/21/masturbation-is-totally-gay/
I like how the definition of “lazy” is “not turning 18, getting a job, dating, meeting women, falling in love and entering into a life-long commitment with another human being.” GET OFF THE COUCH, LOSERS.


Question: My wife and I watched pornography together a lot before we became Christians and imitated what we saw people doing on the television. We both really enjoy watching pornography and wonder if it is okay to continue watching pornography if we do it together and only have sex with each other?

Answer: No, you should not watch pornography because it is a sin of lust. Also, you do not want your lovely wife to think of herself as a whore. Since it is your job to wash her with the Word of God, cleansing her and making her holy, you should put down your dirty, defiling porn and pick up your Bible as the beginning point for your marital intimacy.

That's hilarious. Nothing dirty about getting your dad drunk so he will impregnate you. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lot_%28biblical_person%29#Lot_and_his_daughters)

[Eonwe]

Wasn't he the guy that founded Turkey?

Haha! Win!




I guess I'm officially too frigging old. My brain kind of froze with the idea that a woman wouldn't have a problem with letting her friends, family and coworkers know that she travels with a vibrator. I'm sure a lot of women do that, but I would think few women would want to share that information on their blog.


Well, this isn't the issue at all, but thanks for sharing your prudishness. Sex is a natural, biological inclination and many, many people have few if any hang-ups about enjoying it. If it comforts you, please continue to assume that women have zero interest in sex outside of procreation and the vibrator in question was for her achy back. Feel better?


Gotta go with Joel on this one, at least partially.

Because, and I admit that this is me talking out my ass here, I'm sure she wouldn't have blogged about a TSA agent leaving a note about her Harry Potter book ("Snape kills Dumbledore!"). Yes, according to the letter of the law it would have been just as inappropriate, but this is bad because dildos and sex are private.

Which is why she blogged about it.

We live in a very confused time with regards to sex, where we flaunt, flirt, and discuss sex as if it's the most public thing, and yet at the same time are both appalled and titillated whenever details of someone's sexual behavior is made public, or talked about too directly.

. . . which is a tangent, I guess. But it's worth thinking about, IMHO, because I'd be willing to bet good money that without the allure of SEXDILDOS!!!!111, no one would care about this story at all.

SEX is what inspired the agent to write the note, SEX is what inspired the blogger to blog, and SEX is what got the internets interested in her blog.

FWIW, I agree with the TSA's handling of the situation.

[Acsenray]

Basically, this cunt with a website went through customs with a vibrator. This fact was not made public (by the TSA agent) in any way. Upon arriving at her room the cunt discovered a note that appears to reference the fact that she had a vibrator in her bag. This cunt then went to the internet to point out the fact that someone whose job it was to go through her luggage discovered a vibrator, and instead of just letting it go, this TSA agent left her a personal note. This cunt decided to make a big deal about this and get some publicity for her blog/twitter feed so she acted like this was a huge invasion of her privacy and a hugely innappropriate act by a TSA agent that was just being a human being.

I'm siding with the cunt. This was hugely inappropriate and unprofessional. It's bad enough that we are subject to these kinds of searches. There is no excuse for creepy commentary. I don't know whether dismissal was the appropriate response, but I see nothing wrong with what the traveller did in this case.

[Crazyhorse]

Wrote one, dude. Wrote one.

Of this I had no doubt.

[Annie-Xmas]

Ah, yes. Any woman who has a sex toy deserves any disrespect she gets. After all, she is showing herself to be a woman who *gasp) likes sex.

I image the OP uses the C-word for all victims of rape, too.

[Tully Mars]

This story reminds me of flying out of Sangster in Montego Bay back before they got X-ray machines. They opened and rifled through most suitcases on a table at the head of the long check-in line. It took forever. If they found a sex toy, they held it up for everyone to see.

Public Service Announcement: It's a good idea to remove the batteries before you pack them into the suitcase.

[Lady of the Lake]

Wow. That's a sickening read. The negative comments on her blog seem positively menacing now.

You are not kidding. I think I actually read the argument that this is all her fault because she brought a vibrator. Because women are not supposed to use vibrators, we're supposed to have a man for that.

Though I don't think my "manbrator" would quite fit in an overhead bin...

[aerodave]

we need more raging cunts! We need more raging cunts!

It serves the TSA as..les just right.

Who types out "cunt" and self-censors "asshole" in the same post?

[Cat Whisperer]

Who types out "cunt" and self-censors "asshole" in the same post?
That guy {points up-thread}.

[Hershele Ostropoler]

it's just the equivalent of the checkout guy making comments on your purchases as he scans them.
Yes, well, I don't want them to do that. But if I find the clerks are infringing on my right to decide when and with whom I socialize, I can simply go to another store.

As to the agent "just being human," personally I don't want them to be human while they're rifling through my bags—I'd prefer they be as robotic as possible, or ideally an actual robot.
Yeah, if I can't,in practical terms, not have them go through my luggage, they should be discreet about it.

"Drive until you hit the ocean" is always a good plan. -- viewed 630 times

Just paid five euro to look at this statue of a goat. Tourism! -- viewed 720 times

Getting my Joyce on. -- viewed 1620 times

Just unpacked my suitcase and found this note from TSA. Guess they discovered a "personal item" in my bag. Wow. -- viewed 206625 times
I'm curious as to why your response to the assertion that she wasn't using this incident to garner blog hits was to post Twitter stats.

Is it your contention that bloggers, and blogging by it's very nature, are not often directly based on attention whoring, traffic driving, and ad revenue?
Not like you, who never says "boo" on the internet. You avoid anything anywhere public, like message boards.

[The Tao's Revenge]

Who types out "cunt" and self-censors "asshole" in the same post?

The dandy man can

Who takes a thread and fills it with rage,

The dandy man can

...
ITT ruining the classic Willy Wonka movie.

[Crazyhorse]

I'm curious as to why your response to the assertion that she wasn't using this incident to garner blog hits was to post Twitter stats.

Twitter is a blog, its just on their server and limited to short messages. I'm sure the hits on her other blog are proportionately higher on the TSA entry than the other entries there too, but that is obvious so I'm not sure why you're even making the distinction.

Not like you, who never says "boo" on the internet. You avoid anything anywhere public, like message boards.

Exactly. A 'blogger' and the mini bloggers via Twitter and Facebook are a much more attention whoring crowd in general than those who post anonymously on an internet forum.

If someone wants to tell the world what they think about this or that, whatever it may be, to some little following of groupies on the internet, including things that happened during their vacations or notes left from the TSA in their bags, that's fine with me. I don't have to read it. But to do so while saying she really doesn't want any attention, she never intended for it to be a big story, and she just wishes it would all go away, while continuing to blog and re-blog it, is totally, sickeningly disingenuous and anyone who could look past their own knee-jerk RO over vibrator comments (which didn't bother her at all) should be able to see that.

[JoelUpchurch]

Discreet. For the love of all that's holy, people, learn the difference between these two damn words if you are going to use them.


Sorry about the typo. I use the word discrete all the time, so my brain didn't flag it as wrong.

And since Jill doesn't work for a firm, she's the only one who gets to decide if she's revealing too much.

That is incorrect. She works for a New York law firm. I looked at her web page at the firm.

Feministe is rarely a cesspool, until it's trolled assmonkeys who saw a link on Fox News or, when the AutoAdmit thing blew up, by all the douchebag dudebro sexist pigs who thought the AutoAdmit thing was funny and why did girls always have to harsh their squee.

You don't understand the extent of contemptible behavior at AutoAdmit.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030602705.html

Many companies do Google searches on job candidates and these people were actually trying to sabotage the women that would be competing with them for law firm positions.

MS Filipovich discusses it here:

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/03/07/wapo-calls-out-law-school-pervs/

[Troppus]

Haha! Win!

Gotta go with Joel on this one, at least partially.

Because, and I admit that this is me talking out my ass here, I'm sure she wouldn't have blogged about a TSA agent leaving a note about her Harry Potter book ("Snape kills Dumbledore!"). Yes, according to the letter of the law it would have been just as inappropriate, but this is bad because dildos and sex are private.

Which is why she blogged about it.

We live in a very confused time with regards to sex, where we flaunt, flirt, and discuss sex as if it's the most public thing, and yet at the same time are both appalled and titillated whenever details of someone's sexual behavior is made public, or talked about too directly.

. . . which is a tangent, I guess. But it's worth thinking about, IMHO, because I'd be willing to bet good money that without the allure of SEXDILDOS!!!!111, no one would care about this story at all.

SEX is what inspired the agent to write the note, SEX is what inspired the blogger to blog, and SEX is what got the internets interested in her blog.

FWIW, I agree with the TSA's handling of the situation.

No, it really is simple. Persons in the medical profession do it routinely. The nurse who checks you in for a yearly exam asks "Are you sexually active?" not "You been getting a lot since your last visit?" During a routine exam, gyno notes some changes in your cervix since last exam rather than saying "Looks like some wear and tear on your junk here, lady, you must be getting pounded."

Just consider Jill's audience; I seriously doubt readers of Feministe are scandalized by a vibrator. The unprofessional and crass comment coming from an agency which has been screaming "Trust us with your naked body and personal items! We are here to protect you!" since 9/11 is the ironic blog fodder, not the silly toy.

Besides...she wasn't sporting it on a chain around her neck, just hoping for some random stranger to comment in order to generate blog buzz. She was chatting it up with an audience of liberal, modern-thinking women. If someone picked up the story and ran to the presses while giggling like a 13 year old boy, it says more about the media's fascination with scandal than it does about Jill's motivation in posting the two sentence anecdote.

[thirdwarning]

The TSA luggage inspection job involves looking for specific things. It doesn't involve checking to see what passengers carry in their luggage. If the items they're trained to look for aren't there, nothing else should garner their attention. I realize it's asking a lot, and probably more than most people could do, but once the piece of luggage has passed without them finding anything dangerous in it, they should ideally not be able to tell you what else it might have contained. It's not supposed to be about cataloguing the contents of the suitcase.
How anybody could think that a comment, from a total stranger, regarding one's sexual activities or preferences, especially from a stranger who has had access to one's personal items, should be interpreted as playful, or encouraging, or anything at all but creepy and inappropriate, is completely beyond me.

People keep talking like this TSA employee is just one person, and it's just one incident, but we have no way to know that. Who knows if they're down there waving things around, yelling, "Look what's in this bag!" "I wonder what she's doing with thi-i-is." We also don't know if this employee made a habit of this, and most people are just too embarrassed to report it, or decide not to interrupt a trip or go back to talk to someone.

[Troppus]

You don't understand the extent of contemptible behavior at AutoAdmit.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030602705.html

Many companies do Google searches on job candidates and these people were actually trying to sabotage the women that would be competing with them for law firm positions.

MS Filipovich discusses it here:

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/03/07/wapo-calls-out-law-school-pervs/

Yeah, this is what I was referring to as well, JoelUpchurch. The "cesspool" being the collection of mysogynistic comments on both blogs. I hope my apology to you was clear; I might have bristled at your initial suggestion that Jill keep her sexuality to herself for her own good, but I wouldn't peg you for a minute as a contributor of woman-hating bile like that.

[JoelUpchurch]

Wow. That's a sickening read. The negative comments on her blog seem positively menacing now.

I stand by my feelings about Jill's refreshing lack of prudishness, and I really can't see her blog entry as anything but a humerous anecdote that's been blown way out of proportion. But please forgive my nasty advice about posting your negative feelings on her blog; I'm quite sure you don't belong in that cesspool.

I didn't actually read the comments that were posted, since I didn't what to exposure myself to such filth. I am kind of curious if any of the screen names might have seemed familar?

[Troppus]

I didn't actually read the comments that were posted, since I didn't what to exposure myself to such filth. I am kind of curious if any of the screen names might have seemed familar?

I didn't notice. It isn't that comments are any more vulgar than what can be read here, it's the near-rage behind the comments in both blogs that is shocking. As you indicated, the Autoadmit comments just prove how helpless we are to protect our online personas. The nasty comments on Feministe implying that women have no business masturbating simply because men are available to fill the need are just gross and sad.

[Eonwe]

No, it really is simple. Persons in the medical profession do it routinely. The nurse who checks you in for a yearly exam asks "Are you sexually active?" not "You been getting a lot since your last visit?" During a routine exam, gyno notes some changes in your cervix since last exam rather than saying "Looks like some wear and tear on your junk here, lady, you must be getting pounded."


You misunderstand me . . . I agree completely with this. The TSA agent was wrong. I was in no way trying to imply otherwise (unless I misunderstand what you're getting at in the above quote)


Just consider Jill's audience; I seriously doubt readers of Feministe are scandalized by a vibrator. The unprofessional and crass comment coming from an agency which has been screaming "Trust us with your naked body and personal items! We are here to protect you!" since 9/11 is the ironic blog fodder, not the silly toy.


No, I don't think they're scandalized, but people are fascinated with sex because it's taboo. It's one person in a million who
Besides...she wasn't sporting it on a chain around her neck, just hoping for some random stranger to comment in order to generate blog buzz. She was chatting it up with an audience of liberal, modern-thinking women. If someone picked up the story and ran to the presses while giggling like a 13 year old boy, it says more about the media's fascination with scandal than it does about Jill's motivation in posting the two sentence anecdote.[/QUOTE]

I guess my point is that if Joel was being a prude for thinking it was any kind of big deal for a person to talk about her own use of sex toys/aids in print, then it's prudish for anyone to care that this was Jill's 'personal' item being commented on.

I suppose that we will just have to agree to disagree on whether it's possible for liberal, modern-thinking women to get a kick out of talking about sex, and also about whether anyone would have cared if this story had involved commenting on the color of a scarf in her luggage as opposed to her sex toy.

But yes, the agent was unprofessional, rude, and rightfully fired.

[Troppus]

You misunderstand me . . . I agree completely with this. The TSA agent was wrong. I was in no way trying to imply otherwise (unless I misunderstand what you're getting at in the above quote)


I guess my point is that if Joel was being a prude for thinking it was any kind of big deal for a person to talk about her own use of sex toys/aids in print, then it's prudish for anyone to care that this was Jill's 'personal' item being commented on.

I suppose that we will just have to agree to disagree on whether it's possible for liberal, modern-thinking women to get a kick out of talking about sex, and also about whether anyone would have cared if this story had involved commenting on the color of a scarf in her luggage as opposed to her sex toy.

But yes, the agent was unprofessional, rude, and rightfully fired.

No, I gotcha. I just disagree with the statement that we should expect people to lose their composure over the mere presence of a vibrator. The item was tucked away in her suitcase, not hanging around her neck. Professionals know better. I guarantee they see worse things...who knows what prompted the agent to comment, or maybe the agent routinely writes inappropriate comments but this one time had the misfortune to call out a blogger. I feel that Jill probably knows her feminist audience well enough to recognize that the admission of traveling with a sex toy wouldn't raise any flags, but, but unprofessional conduct from TSA agents is pretty newsworthy.

So I don't feel that she had any idea what a duststorm the reference to a sex aid would stir up because her audience consisting mostly of modern women is presumably comfortable with all things sexual. I bet she expected a couple laughs over the unexpected crass comment. That's all I would expect from my peers.

But seriously... the fuss her blog entry created opened a necessary dialogue both about privacy concerns with the TSA, and about a bunch of fellas getting their boxers in twist because a woman dared masturbate without considering their feelings.

[madmonk28]

Call me old fashioned, but I don't like the idea of federal agents searching through a citizen's private things and then making comments on said citizen's masturbatory habits.

[silenus]

At least this TSA agent knew what the thing was. Last time the then girlfriend now wife and I went through Salt Lake City, the agents saw some entertainment items in our carry-ons and didn't know what to make of them. I had to explain to the poor benighted probably Mormon jerks just what a vibrator was, how it was used and that it was doubtful I could take over an airliner with one.

[runner pat]

At least this TSA agent knew what the thing was. Last time the then girlfriend now wife and I went through Salt Lake City, the agents saw some entertainment items in our carry-ons and didn't know what to make of them. I had to explain to the poor benighted probably Mormon jerks just what a vibrator was, how it was used and that it was doubtful I could take over an airliner with one.


"I'm holding the stewardess hostage. If you don't open that cockpit door, I'll make her come again."

[JoelUpchurch]

Yeah, this is what I was referring to as well, JoelUpchurch. The "cesspool" being the collection of mysogynistic comments on both blogs. I hope my apology to you was clear; I might have bristled at your initial suggestion that Jill keep her sexuality to herself for her own good, but I wouldn't peg you for a minute as a contributor of woman-hating bile like that.

Yes your apology was clear. Thank you very much.

[Capitaine Zombie]

"I'm holding the stewardess hostage. If you don't open that cockpit door, I'll make her come again."

Golf clap

[Quint]

What did the TSA employee's raging cunt do to get her fired? Was it shouting obscenities during patdowns? Did it wolf whistle at construction workers in tight t-shirts at the new terminal? Maybe her cunt has Tourette's!! Won't somebody think about the raging cunts??

[CanvasShoes]

I think a more appropriate analogy would be if the note said "Play on, playa!"

Perhaps people are reading the "freak" part of the note as an insult. I didn't read it that way. I read it as saying, basically, "You go girl!"

If the note had, in fact, said "You go girl!", would all of you still think that it was a wildly innappropriate violation of privacy?
bolding mine.

Yes! Of course! What? Are you mentally damaged? It's not WHAT he said, it's THAT wrote it, placed it in her personal items, and intended it to be found by her later. As she said herself (very paraphrased) it's indicative of the poor behaviour and the failures of the TSA as a whole where it comes to respecting our rights to privacy and dignity.

[CanvasShoes]

At least this TSA agent knew what the thing was. Last time the then girlfriend now wife and I went through Salt Lake City, the agents saw some entertainment items in our carry-ons and didn't know what to make of them. I had to explain to the poor benighted probably Mormon jerks just what a vibrator was, how it was used and that it was doubtful I could take over an airliner with one.
SNORT!!!! Ow ow...You just made me frighten my dog! :D

[JoelUpchurch]

I had to explain to the poor benighted probably Mormon jerks just what a vibrator was, how it was used and that it was doubtful I could take over an airliner with one

I'm an Atheist myself, but I'm curious about why you feel it necessary to refer to Mormons as jerks. It seems rather gratuitous.

[silenus]

I'm an Atheist myself, but I'm curious about why you feel it necessary to refer to Mormons as jerks. It seems rather gratuitous.

Read the line again. I didn't say Mormons were jerks. I said those particular TSA drones were jerks. And probably Mormons as well, which would explain their lack of understanding about vibrators.

[Vinyl Turnip]

I'm an Atheist myself, but I'm curious about why you feel it necessary to refer to Mormons as jerks. It seems rather gratuitous.

Gratuitous because it's undeserved, or redundant?

[madmonk28]

If you read one of the stories that Rucksinator links to, that “raging cunt” had this to say:

The note was inappropriate, the agent in question acted unprofessionally when s/he put in my bag, there should be consequences and I'm glad the TSA takes these things seriously. But I get no satisfaction in hearing that someone may be in danger of losing their job over this. I would much prefer a look at why 'security' has been used to justify so many intrusions on our civil liberties, rather than fire a person who made a mistake.”

Plus, he defends using the word cunt so many times with this gem:

I had been drinking when I wrote this. In hindsight, only 1 or 2 uses of the word would have sufficed.

Wow, a drunken misogynist, Mrs. Rucksinator is a lucky woman.

[Hippy Hollow]

Yeah, OP is totally off on this one. No idea what inspired the use of the word "cunt," either. :confused:

No TSA agent should be writing notes of any kind in people's luggage. It's completely inappropriate. And amazingly, I agree with Bricker on this one. You may well have seen my private materials and laughed your head off behind closed doors, but it is the nadir of professionalism to make that known to anyone. I mean, does this TSA agent have time to write notes? No wonder people are smuggling all kinds of weapons past security.

I try to respect the job that TSA workers do, but I have personally witnessed many behaving unprofessionally (cracking jokes, tossing trays around, snapping at passengers). This, as well as the case of the protester finding a note in his luggage, doesn't do much to help the brand.

[JoelUpchurch]

Read the line again. I didn't say Mormons were jerks. I said those particular TSA drones were jerks. And probably Mormons as well, which would explain their lack of understanding about vibrators.

You didn't express yourself very well. You should have said, "these jerks, who were probably Mormons". By saying "Mormon jerks" you were implying Mormons are jerks. Your speculation about their religious orientation was unnecessary and gratuitous.

[Crazyhorse]

You didn't express yourself very well. You should have said, "these jerks, who were probably Mormons".

Actually that is what he said. Some commas would have probably helped

"I had to explain to the poor, benighted, probably Mormon, jerks just what a vibrator was"

[JoelUpchurch]

Gratuitous because it's undeserved, or redundant?

Undeserved. I know quite a few Mormons. As an Atheist, I don't accept their theology, but the behavior of Mormons I know strikes me as better than average.

[Troppus]

Considering what information is available on the The LDS official website (http://lds.org/?lang=eng), I would be a little miffed at having to explain marital aids to persons subscribing to a belief system which associates an inordinate amount of shame with all things sexual.

I'm not going to mention the modesty garment as it is the constant source of wisecracks about LDS behavior and its use is often misrepresented, but here are some other directives from the LDS website: "After marriage young wives should be occupied in bearing and rearing children.

Remember the prime purpose of sex desire is to beget children. Sex gratification must be had at that hazard.

Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of his church...

The unholy transgression of homosexuality ..."

Sexual pleasure is considered a "hazard" of making more Mormons rather than a natural, biological inclination or a bonding activity between consenting adults. silenus and companion were there to fly, not undergo scrutiny by someone who condemns a very private sexual activity. If I were in his place, it isn't the belief system itself that would make me think "Mind your own business, jerks" it is the LDS church's habit of shaming those who do not repress natural instincts.

Regardless of clashing belief systems, I somehow credit Mormon TSA agents with possessing better discretion than the agent from the OP.

[Troppus]

I really didn't explain myself well at all there. I think the "jerk" sentiment is contextual. If silenus was toting a TENS unit or some other unfamiliar device, the belief system of the agent wouldn't even be considered or remarked upon.

But prior knowledge of Mormon sexual practices such as this gem: "After marriage young wives should be occupied in bearing and rearing children." (http://lds.org/ensign/1975/02/the-marriage-decision?lang=eng&query=sex+desire) means some of us don't want to explain to Mormons that a woman's sexual pleasure is not only being considered, but pursued in earnest (as evidenced by the toys).

silenus, am I getting warm here?

[silenus]

On the nosey! I live in a highly Mormon town and consider an number of them friends. Crazyhorse parsed my comment correctly. I was taught to not put a comma after the last of my modifiers, so it read "probably Mormon jerks" rather than "probably Mormon, jerks."

[saoirse]

Sorry about the typo. I use the word discrete all the time, so my brain didn't flag it as wrong.

But I agreed: lawyers really should be separate and distinct!

As far as discretion goes, she actually handled it in the most effective way possible. If she had contacted the TSA herself, the employee might still have been fired, but other employees might well have continued doing it, and getting away with it because many flyers would be too embarrassed to complain. If it harms Ms. Flipovic's career (it probably won't) then I'm glad she took one for the country.

But she should definitely not be merged with other attorneys into one undistinguished mass.

[Saint Cad]

Will it hijack the thread if I point out that when the family last flew out of LAX we went threw the "nudie booth" in less than 30 seconds for all 3 of us. The 20 year old hot piece of ass after us was in there 3 minutes.

[Gary Kumquat]

Will it hijack the thread if I point out that when the family last flew out of LAX we went threw the "nudie booth" in less than 30 seconds for all 3 of us. The 20 year old hot piece of ass after us was in there 3 minutes.

I was in line behind a very attractive woman the last time I left IAH. A very similar thing happened.

[Troppus]

Will it hijack the thread if I point out that when the family last flew out of LAX we went threw the "nudie booth" in less than 30 seconds for all 3 of us. The 20 year old hot piece of ass after us was in there 3 minutes.

I was in line behind a very attractive woman the last time I left IAH. A very similar thing happened.

The next time you witness such behavior from TSA agents, don’t be a raging cunt and and blog about it here. Instead, high five the agent and offer your unsolicited approval with an enthusiastic “You go, girl/boy! Get your freak on!” Because those hot girls have it coming, and because it is the appropriate response when confronted with evidence of human sexuality in a professional setting.

[saoirse]

Will it hijack the thread if I point out that when the family last flew out of LAX we went threw the "nudie booth" in less than 30 seconds for all 3 of us. The 20 year old hot piece of ass after us was in there 3 minutes.

The 9/11 hijackers were known to frequent strip clubs. Perhaps the TSA has information that they recruited followers there. I'm sure that's what it is. What else could it be?

[jtgain]

I agree with the majority here, but my opinion is that it doesn't matter that the device was sexual. It matters that the TSA agent, instead of invading a person's privacy and moving on, felt the need to reinforce the fact that he was able to legally invade that person's privacy.

If the lady had a Yankee's cap in her luggage and the agent wrote a note that said, "Go Yankees!" then I would support firing him as well. First, for being a Yankees fan, and second for not acting like a professional. It's a sad, unfortunate fact that Americans have to be treated like criminals when they fly. It's not your job to comment on their possessions in any way.

[Hershele Ostropoler]

If the lady had a Yankee's cap in her luggage and the agent wrote a note that said, "Go Yankees!" then I would support firing him as well. First, for being a Yankees fan, and second for not acting like a professional. It's a sad, unfortunate fact that Americans have to be treated like criminals when they fly. It's not your job to comment on their possessions in any way.

This is my feeling. If a passenger doesn't have a choice about the search, it is all the more incumbent on the TSA agents to be as invisible, impersonal, and robotic about their work as possible.

[Malleus, Incus, Stapes!]

The sexual angle does make it 200% creepier.

[carnut]

Same agency which promised discretion when given the power to see through our clothes? Same agency trusted with patting our privates, and going through our personal items?

Inappropriate, unprofessional, indiscrete, creepy, and jerkish behavior. The agent was totally out of line. And the OP shows an equal degree of cluelessness.

Agreed. But was the woman posting what happened to her out of line? I think so. She could have chosen to handle it in a less blatant way. But she was nowhere near as out of line as the Agent. He was supposed to be professional.

[ajb867]

No way a guy wrote that note. Informal poll....any males handwriting look like that? The defense rests. Fucking cunt...

[Troppus]

Agreed. But was the woman posting what happened to her out of line? I think so. She could have chosen to handle it in a less blatant way. But she was nowhere near as out of line as the Agent. He was supposed to be professional.

The difference being there is no impetus on Jill to refrain from sharing whatever she likes on her blog. She did not violate the privacy of another person, and she did not break any professional rules of conduct by sharing her experience. The agent did both. Even if an observer feels that Jill's disclosure is in poor taste, Jill was not remotely out of line by merely sharing an irritating experience with an unnamed TSA agent with her target audience.

[carnut]

The difference being there is no impetus on Jill to refrain from sharing whatever she likes on her blog. She did not violate the privacy of another person, and she did not break any professional rules of conduct by sharing her experience. The agent did both. Even if an observer feels that Jill's disclosure is in poor taste, Jill was not remotely out of line by merely sharing an irritating experience with an unnamed TSA agent with her target audience.

Oh yes, I agree she has a right to say whatever she wants in her blog. I just question the wisdom of it. The TSA guy was way out of line and should have been fired. I just wonder if it was wise for her to be so public about it. Just random thoughts, not my problem anyway.

[runner pat]

Perhaps with enough public scrutiny, the abuses of the TSA might be addressed and rectified.
Then again, maybe it will be possible to teach pigs to sing.

[Saint Cad]

Oh yes, I agree she has a right to say whatever she wants in her blog. I just question the wisdom of it. The TSA guy was way out of line and should have been fired. I just wonder if it was wise for her to be so public about it. Just random thoughts, not my problem anyway.

Why should she be quiet about it? To protect TSA so the terrorists don't win? To not publicize that she uses a vibrator and it should be between her and some random government worker? Because a woman shouldn't be offended when someone affirms her sexuality? Because the TSA worker intended it to be a private note?

Give us a reason for why she shouldn't have publicize the event.

[Acsenray]

In other words, isn't this exactly the kind of thing that we want people using the internet for?