Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Overheard on CNN.com: Sex-crime victims' take on TSA

 

COMMENT OF THE DAY: "I guess I personally don't care if someone sees me in a body scan or even pats me down. I'm more upset that we are forced to do it." --cjb21980

 

Editor's note: This post was written by Kristine Griggs, a member of our comments staff.

 

Sex-crime victims who opt for pat downs instead of full-body scans at airports face more than inconvenience and blushed cheeks. They might have disabling traumatic flashbacks that can last for days or weeks. And while survivors of sex crimes generally understand the need for safety regulations, many CNN readers think all fliers' rights are being violated by the new regulations and that they simply don't work. Still others are sympathetic both to the victims of sex crimes and the Transportation Security Administration agents who have to perform their duties. Check out what readers are saying about this and other stories on CNN.com:

 

TSA pat downs concern sex-crime groups

 

WPBWPC expressed sympathy for sex crime victims, but like many other readers, wondered why they opt out of the body scan. "I truly feel badly for those who are traumatized by the pat-downs but they can always go through the scanner as an option. I don't prefer the scanner but that's my option. I fly almost weekly for work and don't have an option on whether to fly or not (except to get another job)." And thinkandask didn't want readers to think this issue only applies to women, adding that it's relevant for male survivors of sexual abuse as well: "One in six men actually...including me. However, the greatest irony for survivors of sexual assault, in my view, is that we had no choice or protection as boys and now if we get chosen for a pat-down while traveling, we have no choice once again."

 

Jodey said, "I was raped twice in the space of five years. I got counseling, worked very hard at recovery ... and I got an airport pat-down last month with no problems. What's the big deal?" And mcarmstrong noted, "So because some people aren't as traumatized by an assault as much as others, it's no big deal for the ones that are? I know rape victims that are happy and don't even think about it and victims who are afraid to leave their apartments. Neither is a wrong response."

 

Total lunar eclipse gives heavenly show

 

Spectators from around the globe enjoyed the lunar eclipse and shared some of their experiences with CNN. readrofnews said "What a fantastic show of nature last night. Sat on the front porch in the freezing cold and watched for an hour. Not many people here where I work actually took the time to see a phenomenon that they possibly might not see again. Carpe diem or carpe nocturnum in this case."  Onlyboxers wrote that it " Was amazing here in Florida! Very clear sky! Finally see the stars!" SheepSlap said they  "Did a crazy cool moon ritual last night- drums and dancing ya!" jlm88 "Watched it from my backyard last night. Turned deep red, very nice. very very nice."  silverfaery3 "All I can say it was an amazing view. I went out at the start of it, and then back out towards the end of it....well worth staying up to watch off and on." Jeannot "I waved my hand and saw the shadow on the moon. That was pretty impressive."

 

Some observers weren't as lucky or simply weren't impressed. 1morenut said, "Unfortunately it was pouring rain here where we live." Bobolink wrote, "As usual, we had dense cloud cover over Kansas City. No matter what the event is or how important, rare and stunning it might have been in impact on the human soul, Kansas City always gets the fuzzy end of the lollipop. If the eclipse had been a football event, the cosmos would have found a way so that we would have had clear ring-side seats. froogle100 said, "I saw some of it, but really after seeing a solar eclipse in china it didn't seem that fascinating." And finally, jlm88 wrote that "Double Rainbow Guy was better than this."

 

2010 U.S. Census Bureau results are generating a lot of response

 

The census report, just released Tuesday, revealed the slowest U.S. population growth since the Great Depression and sparked a lot of debate among CNN readers. The report also got commenters talking about changes in the country's political landscape as well.

 

Myvideotape said "Stop having too many kids...This planet can't sustain any more." CorruptUS agreed: "I for one am all for birth control and decrease the current population level that we have world wide. I think it should be mandated that you can only have two children to maintain current population levels. If I really had my way we would only be allowed to have one child per couple for several generations to decrease the overall population levels in the world and thusly decrease starvation and the depletion of our natural resources!" But flynn1974 had a different view, "1. We have an aging population. Life expectancy has grown, and we are not replacing the elderly with enough young workers. 2. You're worries are based on world numbers. Western civilization is not overpopulated. It is fast becoming underpopulated in terms of supporting itself. 3. The CIA have a website with all the stats you need. The statistical abstract should also help you. 4. According to the UN, below-replacement fertility is expected in 75 percent of the developed world by the year 2050." dwsmithee summed it up: "The problem is that if you reduce population levels too quickly in a generation, the working-aged population could be vastly outnumbered by seniors that are unable to work. You could get into a situation where our society simply cannot support itself with too many mouths to feed and care for and not enough able bodied workers to do it. It would bankrupt social security and other similar programs around the world. It would need to be a very gradual change."

 

YOUR TURN: Now that you've read what other people are saying, do you find that your views align with theirs? Think of this as a wishing well in need of your 2 cents. Post a comment below or sound off on video.

 

Compiled by the CNN.com moderation staff. Some comments edited for length or clarity.

10 Comments
December 21, 2010
Click to view Thruthbomb's profile

Popularizing random people because of their comments is not the brightest idea. We already have enough big headed people in the comment section already.

December 21, 2010
Click to view animaguskatt's profile

Recovering from being the victim of a sexual crime involves regaining a sense of control over your own body -- for example, taking self defense classes, and learning to enjoy sex with your romantic partner because the loving act is far different from the violent act.

 

But the TSA's new rules takes that control away. If you go through the scanners, a stranger is seeing you naked. If you get selected for a pat-down or choose to opt out of the scanner, then you're being touched in intimate areas by a stranger. Either way, a stranger is examining your body in a way that is not consensual.

 

This distresses me as someone who has never been the victim of a sexual crime, so I can only imagine how impossibly difficult this is for sexual assault and rape victims. People who have been victimized should NOT be forced to take a train or drive for days to where they're going to the rest of their lives.

December 21, 2010
Click to view falc02's profile

Take a bus if you don't want to get a pat down, no one is forcing you to fly. It's your choice to fly so once you make that choice you sign up for the issues that go along with it. I don't want to sign in and wear a name badge when I walk into my son's school but it's for his protection so I go along with it. I seriously doubt that the people doing these pat downs enjoy them any more than you do.

December 21, 2010
Click to view doglover1210's profile

I haven't taken a plane in a long time. And yet the thought of the pat-down paralyzes me and will prevent me from flying. Because I am a rape survivor and was beaten and attacked and groped and assaulted by a stranger. I will not put myself through that and I will not allow another stranger to grope me and touch me and bring back that flood of fear and emotion. It took me a long time to gain my sense of self back. There is absolutely no way I will let the government and an airport screener take that back from me. You may think I'm foolish but then chances are you haven't walked in my shoes.

December 21, 2010

since when is the government forcing you to fly?  drive if you are gonna cry about it so much.

December 22, 2010
Click to view qustudent's profile

I think the solution to this problem is simple.  Offer a flight with no security measures in place and no waiting time to board the plane.  Then offer a second flight with the normal TSA protocol and baggage screening.  At least the people on the second flight would know that they are safe even if it meant getting searched.  Terrorism is a real threat in our country and I am bothered that so many people are fighting the TSA for their security policy.  If people are not searched before they get on a plane then the risk of a terrorist attack is greatly increased.  Do we really need to argue this anymore?  The events of 9/11 prove that attacks will occur if people get on places without being searched.

December 22, 2010
Click to view mdireporter's profile

This has gone too far.  I will not fly again unless there is no other choice like going to Europe or the West Coast.  I will not be groped by TSA morons.  I bet all the sex offenders and pedophiles are lining up for TSA jobs.

December 22, 2010
Click to view Aldebaran7's profile

People worry that our population is causing starvation.  That is simply not true.  There have always been poor and starving people throughout all of history.  In terms of population percentage, more in the past than now.  We have more food available now than in the history of the world.  The problem isn't population - it's distribution which is caused by political corruption and unequal distribution of Christianity and Liberty.  More Christianity and Liberty and the world will find it's a big step closer to solving the problem of starvation (poverty is another story since we redefine it based on relative wealth - American "poverty" is a goal in most of the world).

December 22, 2010
Click to view sherridl's profile

I will not go through the scanner because of the radiation.  As a cancer survivor, I already am exposed to more radiation because of the need for frequent tests and ex-rays.  I questioned the amount of radiation and the TSA is not forthcoming with the figure.  In addition, no one is checking the machines - at any time a machine could malfunction and emit a lot more radiation than it should and no one would even know.

 

I would also be extremely uncomfortable with the current TSA's "pat-downs".  I hope not to fly for the time being.

December 23, 2010

We are horny humans by nature. Some more than others;) You cant ask these people to rub & scan over nude xxxrays. Get rid of the SCANNERS.

You must be logged in to post a comment.



About the iReport Blog

The latest and greatest on CNN iReport, brought to you by Team iReport.


Categories Recent posts Monthly Subscribe