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.
Considering what information is available on the The LDS official website, 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.
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.” 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?
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.”
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
The sexual angle does make it 200% creepier.
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.
No way a guy wrote that note. Informal poll…any males handwriting look like that? The defense rests. Fucking cunt…
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.
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.
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.
In other words, isn’t this exactly the kind of thing that we want people using the internet for?