Voice of Dissent: TSA Pat-Downs are NOT Sexual Assault
The TSA's latest ramping-up of its security checks , namely, the "enhanced" pat-downs, has been all over the news, internet, and blogosphere lately. With YouTube videos, Twitter hashtags, and comment threads that for the most part, support the outrage and condemnation presented by journalists, bloggers, and video posters alike, the general public seems to have reached its verdict on the new procedures.
And I agree with this condemnation. Before I get to my problem with some of what's being written, let me make it very clear - I am not a fan of these latest additions to our "security" procedures for air travel. While I understand the reasoning behind them, I feel they are being implemented poorly and without adequate training for their agents. If not done properly, it's humiliating, uncomfortable, possibly frightening if we're talking about children, and for the most part, unneccesary when you look at who is receiving a good portion of these advanced searches. And for the record, I have been on the receiving end of one of these.
But where I don't agree with many who are writing about this including fellow mom-bloggers, is where it's being referred to as sexual assault. I understand that if you've been subjected to one of these and the agent you had did not follow proper procedure and explain to you what was going to happen and offer to have it done in privacy, that you were likely shocked and uncomfortable. Mortified even. But not sexually assaulted.
The TSA agents are doing what they have been told they have to do now, under certain circumstances. Their motivation is to do their job, pick up that paycheck, and hopefully, keep our air travel a little safer. They are not patting you down for sexual pleasure, either yours, or theirs. They are not commiting a sexual act upon you nor are they trying to force you in to one. They are not enacting violence upon you. No matter how hard you think that agent might be crushing on you, really, they are not doing this because secretly they are all homosexual (given that the searches are done by same-sex agents) predators that have just been waiting for their chance to grope as many people as they possibly can on a daily basis. Which is, if you think about it, what is being suggested if you follow the logic of those who claim they are being or have been "sexually assaulted" by the TSA under the newest pat-down guidelines.
Again, I understand that people going through this are upset, and I don't blame them for that. It's the crying wolf I object to. And as someone who has been sexually assaulted twice in my life, I feel the need to speak up about this.
Yes, assault can come in many forms, under many different circumstances and be commited by many different types of people. The two I suffered were completely different from each other in more ways than I can count, yet both still sexual assaults. The common denominator? Motivation. Intent. And that is what is lacking in these situations with the TSA. What someone who is truly sexually assaulting you is intending and or trying to accomplish and what the TSA agents are doing, are not even in the same ballpark.
I read one blog post in particular where the writer stated in capital letters (for effect, I assume) that she had been SEXUALLY ASSAULTED more times than you could imagine. Honestly? It was offensive. She went on to state that she was demanding counseling for the trauma of this SEXUAL ASSAULT by the TSA. Well, and this is going to sound nasty, but, seriously? How about I tell you what a REAL sexual assault is like, in every last detail, and then you tell me how equivalent you think your experience at the airport was? I am not tring to suggest that the experience was not traumatic for her. Obviously it was upsetting. It was not an assault though, and this is what I think people should understand. I can pretty much guarantee you that if the same blogger heaven forbid ever DID experience a true assault, that she would agree.
I have been assaulted, and I have also had the "new" pat down. Please, please, stop belittling and demeaning what some of us have gone through by suggesting they are the same, or even equating the two.
Concerned about your kids going through this, especially since these days we are so careful to tell them no one should touch them in certain places? EXPLAIN it to them. Tell them why it's being done, that you will be near by, and that there is nothing for them to be afraid of. Should they be doing this to children? No, I don't believe they should be. But they are not assaulting your kids, and if you don't freak out about it, then maybe your kids will be less likely to be upset if they do end up having to go through it.
Should the TSA re-think this? Yes. And if they are going to keep the policy in place they really need to make some changes to ensure proper procedures are followed by every single agent and that everyone's rights are being protected as much as they can be.
But in my opinion, the cries of "sexual assault!" are inappropriate.
*Originally postedon my BlogHer profile 11.15.10*
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Liane Carter
Mimetalker
Pamela Cytrynbaum
Lucy Mercer
Kerry Lauerman
Joan Walsh
Salon.com
Comments
I agree with your quibbles about choice of words; but we should not forget that the harassment shown here can very easily be taken further into REAL sexual assault, given the bullying, abusive mentality behind all this. If a person is willing to forcibly invade another's privates to punish him/her for being uppity and questioning the status quo, that's a rapist's mentality right there. And in any case, the line between "harassment" and "assault" is not always clear.
As I stated in the article, I don't agree with the policy AND think it's being implemented poorly. But regardless of whether or not you agree with it, it is not sexual in nature nor motivation. You just accused TSA agents of thinking like rapists. I would urge you to think about that statement a little. They are following policy that was NOT created by the agents having to do the checks. Not all of them are doing it properly for sure, as I also mentioned. But to just claim all of it is strictly harassment and that this only semantics is unjustified and misleading.
Unless you have actually been sexually assaulted, it might be hard to really understand the differences here. As someone who has been, I can tell you that the difference is beyond description.
Like I said, I'm not defending the TSA's policy. But calling what they're doing either sexual harassment or sexual assault is, in my opinion, simply not appropriate.
If you were paying attention to Twitter yesterday, a user made #TSAslogans a popular trend. People were making jokes about TSA's new procedures and body scanners and, I think, properly ridiculing the federal government. The humor was refreshing and revealed that Americans might have reached a tipping point where they no longer tolerate airports as Fourth Amendment-free zones.
I understand the frustration sexual assault victims might have when they hear TSA accused of sexually assaulting passengers. But, I think one has to ask what sexual assault happens to be.
The legal definition, according to the National Center for Victims of Crime, is:
"Sexual assault takes many forms including attacks such as rape or attempted rape, as well as any unwanted sexual contact or threats. Usually a sexual assault occurs when someone touches any part of another person's body in a sexual way, even through clothes, without that person's consent..."
Touching of genitalia and breasts is going to feel "sexual" to passengers who go through checkpoints. And, passengers who don't like it will process it as "assault."
In a society where sex is intrinsic to a lot of the culture, people are going to inevitably think the touching feels a bit sexual. (Dare I say it, some men might walk away with erections they find themselves hiding with their shoes for a moment).
Many might suggest Americans are being trained to accept absurd security procedures and arbitrary authority that doesn't make sense. Explaining what just happened to children and women who are upset only encourages acceptance of this absurdity.
We're being put through Kafkaesque situations that don't really help prevent terrorism; they let decadent sounding companies like Rapiscan make millions but they don't stop al Qaeda.
Instead of discussing the semantics of how we describe the new procedures, let's get into the real problem: That this security doesn't make us safer and just requires us to give up more civil liberties.
Rated.
. me too . so im willing to share with you a website ==="clothingtrade" us / =====
free shipping accept the paypal
Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.
=== "clothingtrade" us / ====
=== "clothingtrade" us / ====
Sure, some, maybe most TSA agents are probably decent folks who just need a paycheck and they'll take anything in this economy. Maybe they don't personally mean me any harm, but they are working for, and thereby enabling, a system which is abusive. I personally can't entirely separate the system from the person who choses to be a part of it.
I see your point overall and there is a distinction, but the distinction is very narrow, which is why I support motherwell's suggestion to call it sexual harrassment/abuse of police power vs. sexual assault.
At this point, personal items such as a laptop computer can be seized at a border crossing without any explanation required. The general rubric is security. The shift in paradigm is that everyone is suspect until innocence is proven. That extends to everyone - children, senior citizens and even those fly are employed to fly the commercial airlines. It may be wise if there was a pause and a question what price is being paid for this response to terror.
Exactly. I'm not sure I'd even know where to begin to explain this to my child. "Sweetie, I know I told you that no one - not your teacher, not your friend's daddy, not your coach, no one - should be touching you where your bathing suit covers, but really, it's okay for that random man in the airport to grope you. It's all part of keeping you safe, dear." ??? People, including (especially) kids, *should be* upset when something like this happens and we should not be teaching people to relax and accept it.
We shouldn't be arguing the fine points of law. We should, however, know that we have choices re safety.
If you don't want a physical patdown, you can always go through a machine.
Do I like being frisked by airport security? Nope. But I am willing to forfeit a few frisks for your safety as well as my own.
Adios.
I'm not assuming anything; I'm observing that passengers have reported being "patted down" with unnecessary roughness and invasiveness as punishment for refusing to submit to the new "porno-scan" machines. That's the issue here: unnecessary invasion of privacy and humiliation, either through the porno-scans or through the groping they offer as an alternative.
That's why I can say without question that someone purposely placing their hand on my crotch without my expressed permission is an assault and harassing in nature.
I also know something about a (or my) rapist's mentality. If a person, regardless of it being their job or not, touches certain parts of my body while KNOWING that I find it offensive but does it anyways, THAT is a rapist mentality = you are meat and I am going to do what I want if you want me to or not.
Making excuses for the individual TSA employees is like make excuses for individual Nazi prison camp guards... they were just doing their job too, right?
P.S. and please don't think it's a fear of homosexuals thing either, K?
I haven't flown since '91 anyway, everyone should consider that till they change the policies.
The institutionalization of fear we've been in for a decade now means the terrorists succeeded in terrorizing the nation!
Who wants that?
Living like it never happened for private citizens means we win our public life back.
And they lose.
And of course it is a sexual assault by government on the actual bodies of it's victim's via the agency of the TSA screeners.
If they can't keep us afraid they lose too.
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
===== "clothes2" us ====
This is a shopping paradise
I was wondering when/if someone who actually has been sexually assaulted was going to let this blogger know exactly what is what in this mess.
The sense of the blog is as if the blogger was insensetive to the absolute legitimacy of the impact of this on victims of assault.
I'm a guy and, as such, I can't possibly know what a woman in your situation would feel butt, I can imagine that it would be deeply traumatizing.
When someone is "groped/assaulted/touched", not only without their permission butt, forced to comply, that certainly IS sexual assault.
For a blogger to adopt this attitude that this one has is detrimental and damaging to the cause of freedom, decency and human dignity.
Also, I think what troubles me about this is that there is no little door like when you're in line to go on Space Mountain at Disney world that says “If you're getting nervous and want to opt out, you can just do that by going out here.” It doesn't let you ride the ride, but you're out. The problem with the present system is that it assumes that once you've been selected for this ordeal, you must go through it even if you have decided you'd rather take the extraordinary step of canceling a planned and paid for ticket.
You might claim that the person has “voluntarily” submitted by some extraordinarily tenuous claim if it's a condition of flying, but in the recent case, the guy was still getting this done to him after opting out. Once the opt-out has occurred, there is simply no right here, not even in the slightest. I just do not see it.
If on the street a policeman walked up and groped your privates for no other reason than just that you were going somewhere that bad guys go, I'd bet a sexual assault charge would stick. I see nothing different here.
But even if the person wants to board, the problem is that there's no market option to fly a plane where they don't do this. So if someone needs to get from point A to point B, they may have little choice. Claiming this is “voluntary” comes up short in some cases with me. If I need to see family on the other coast, driving and taking the train are not an option—I don't get vacation enough for that to be practical. Flying is it. And the free market doesn't let me pick an airline based on whether it gropes me or not. So I'm not seeing “voluntary” stamped all over this, I'm seeing “Shut up and take the indignity. Your fellow travelers will thank you.” Only I don't think they will. They'd gladly board the no-groping plane if it were offered, or enough would that I'm sure we could fill the plane.
No, what you said was:
"They are not commiting a sexual act upon you nor are they trying to force you in to one. They are not enacting violence upon you. No matter how hard you think that agent might be crushing on you, really, they are not doing this because secretly they are all homosexual (given that the searches are done by same-sex agents) predators that have just been waiting for their chance to grope as many people as they possibly can on a daily basis. Which is, if you think about it, what is being suggested if you follow the logic of those who claim they are being or have been "sexually assaulted" by the TSA under the newest pat-down guidelines."
And, from my persective of somebody else who has been assaulted, I'm saying bullshit.
It's not JUST a matter of being "upset", it is a matter of being forced to allow someone to put their hand on my body where I do not want them to. It isn't just a matter of "if you don't like it, use a different means of transportation" because that just isn't feasible if you are traveling any distance at all.
It also isn't a matter of need. "Pat downs" serve virtually NO purpose. If I wanted to smuggle a weapon or bomb onto a plane they certainly wouldn't find it via a pat down.
After my recent experiences as an in-transit flyer, just changing planes in the States, I decided not to fly there any more. I will pay whatever it takes to fly directly place to place -- no cheap flight can make up for the extreme discomfort of having a stranger's hand up my private parts in public. None. To be kept in a state of fear like that, makes it easy for the government to get away with whatever kind of violation of rights they choose.
I like your "We Won't Fly" campaign. Thanks for telling me about it, Kevin, and Rated for the thought-provoking post, Sarah.
I think the media and blogs are overplaying the "sex" part here (as we always do in this country) and that is taking away from the real problems:
1. the scanners are an un-necessary invasion of privacy
2. apparently and allegedly the TSA seems to have increased the intimate nature of these pat-downs to try to discourage people from opting out (this is what people are alleging)
3. our entire airline security regime is hopelessly over-wraught
the focus on genitals and sex kind of makes it seem like our real problem, as a nation, with this whole thing is that are genitals are being touched. and i think that skirts the real problem, which is not the pat-downs (which are a side-effect) but the SCANNERS and the general ineptitude and farcical nature of our airline security.
And, the TSA lied through it's teeth about not keeping records of the intrusive scans...and still refuses to give up the 40,000 or so that they are keeping.
The swipe search is intrusive and the scans that show if you are circumcised are intrusive. They are being abused and will be abused, pure and simple.
Boycott flying.
Like you say, if the TSA is following all procedures it is not assualt of any form. Invasive and stupid? Yes. Assault with sexual or degrading intent? No.
Folks trying to get to their families for Thanksgiving will have enough to worry about without a bunch of yahoos mucking up the airports with protests.
IT'S TERRORISM folks...you can either have your body screened or blown up at 10,000 feet. Take your pick.
sorry to disturb u. just take u a little time.
If you are in need,
welcome to : (http://www.b2bjordans.com )
If there were a better way to make flying safe, someone would have figured it out.
What is exceptional is the sense of entitlement and indignation expressed in these comments. Let me point out:
1) Your privates are never forcibly invaded in an airport security pat-down. It never happens without your consent. You can choose to forgo your trip. It's a choice.
The usual procedure is that you are asked to stand on a mat and hold out your arms and legs. That is a request for your consent to the pat-down. If you refuse, you are not forcibly patted-down. You are asked to leave the line.
2) Security procedures are usually announced ahead of time. They are not secret. You can find out what they are before you buy your ticket. So, the choice you were given -- pat-down and/or scan or forfeit your ticket was a choice you knew about before you bought the ticket.
3) There are rare occasions when security procedures are suddenly tightened in the wake of a bomb scare. To protect against this, you could buy a refundable ticket. You chose to save money, which you now don't want to forfeit? That was/is a choice.
Choice, people. You have one. That makes it quite different from an assault.
PS, Kent, you might be able to fill a plane with no-grope passengers, but will you find a pilot and flight crew?
I find it a repellent thing to tell the author, a victim of real sexual assault, that her experience is the same as being patted down in an airport - and to take her to task for not believing that you blatherers suffered the same. This shows a remarkable lack of both compassion and sense.
Second, no one who considers this an unwarranted government intrusion makes any response to how else things could be done. It's not as if there isn't an example of explosives being smuggled in someone's underwear (last December 28?). mattgordon, fax paxton and malusinka make intensely reasonable statements that, my bet, no one will be able to refute.
. me too . so im willing to share with you a website ==="bingshop" us / =====
free shipping accept the paypal
Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.
==="bingshop" us / =====
==="bingshop" us / =====
This may be an instance of misplaced anger for most. I hate the terrorist thug ftards who made this whole mess necessary. I have a question: Are Muslims not flying anymore? Because I would think either procedure would be anathema to them what with all their rules about no touches or immodesty.
If there were a better way to make flying safe, someone would have figured it out.
There are PLENTY of better ways to make flying safe. We've been using them for decades, and they don't involve porno-scans or groping toddlers. For starters, have you ever heard of something called "intelligence?" That's how those ink-cartridge bombs were discovered. You really need to catch up on your reading before you lecture others.
What is exceptional is the sense of entitlement and indignation expressed in these comments.
Yeah, we're all such spoiled babies for insisting the Constitution still matters. We should all just quit whining and accept the same sort of tyranny other people have to live with. Who are we to demand better?
Here's a suggestion: if you don't like listening to us spoiled entitled Americans, just go live somewhere where there's less sense of entitlement. Like maybe North Korea.
1) Your privates are never forcibly invaded in an airport security pat-down.
Actual news reports and witnesses indicate that they are. Again, do some research before you pretend you know anything.
Choice, people...
Chanting the word "choice" does not justify any of this. An unreasonable assault is an unreasonable assault. Period.
PS, Kent, you might be able to fill a plane with no-grope passengers, but will you find a pilot and flight crew?
That was never a problem before these invasive porno-scans were instituted. I've never been groped, or porno-scanned, on any of the numerous times I've flown, and all of those flights went off without anyone getting killed. Why should we suddenly pretend it's a problem now?
WRONG! That is not an option once you are in the security area and are "asked" to permit a pat down or to be full body scanned. If you leave or try to leave you will be "investigated" (read harassed) and possibly fined $11,000 like Mr. Tyner is going to be:
"According to Aguilar [Michael J. Aguilar, chief of the TSA office in San Diego] Tyner is under investigation for leaving the security area without permission. That’s prohibited, among other reasons, to prevent potential terrorists from entering security, gaining information, and leaving."
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/15/tsa-probe-
scan-resistor/
For the rest of you that think this is a worthwhile method to combat terrorism I will leave you with the following to contemplate...
"(CNSNews.com) - When asked today if she will insist that Muslim women wearing hijabs must go through full body pat downs before boarding planes, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano did not say yes or no, but told CNSNews.com there will be “adjustments” and “more to come” on the issue.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/napolitano-adjustments-more-
come-body-pa
So break out your hijabs ladies, cuz Janet's going to give you a pass. In other words, if the U.S. Dept of Homeland Security is even CONSIDERING modifying / easing their procedures for Muslim women who are complying with Sharia law, then the entire system is nothing but an absolute farce.
(and no this is not an accusation against Muslim women or their beliefs)
BTW, I hear he applied to become a TSA drone so he can feel up a few hot nuns and Amish chicks... 'Course he'll leave the Muslim women to others though cuz they are so scary.
I've had pat-downs in muslim countries. Because they tend to be hot-beds of terrorism. I was patted down by a woman, in a private booth. The men were scanned.
As far as I know, neither the Koran nor muslim culture has prohibitions against same-gender, non-sexual touching.
It's because I live in a country where human rights can be a bit on the iffy side that I recognize the difference between a choice and none. Between real tyranny and stupid rants. And between a security pat-down and an actual assault.
(which BTW was the actual POINT of this post)
I already posted a letter on the Broadsheet article, but here we go one more time:
The procedures you're reading about in the media don't exist.
It's not happening.
Nobody's fondling your labia.
Nobody's groping your goodies.
Nobody's traumatizing children.
You don't have to explain to your children that it's okay for the strange lady to molest them.
Now, if we're going to have a huge boycott, please let me know well in advance. I'll gladly organize a vacation around a day when everybody else is boycotting the airport. There'll be more room in the carry-on bins for me. I'll put up the arm rest on the empty seat next to me and spread out a bit.
I have had a pacemaker for 15 years, people, and I have been through the old procedures AND the new procedures. And, I have never had anybody grope my genitals, my butt, or my boobs. I'm really sorry to disappoint the paranoiacs out there, but really, this is just not like what you're reading about.
Get a grip, people. You're being misinformed. This is every bit as accurate as the War on Christmas was. This is no different.
Yes, it is true that after profuse apology and explanation, a TSA employee wearing heavy latex gloves did pinch the waistband of my jeans between her fingers. I read the blog post about the woman who claimed that they'd publicly touched her labia, and I had to laugh out loud. She also claimed she was never told there was a possibility of a private screening.
So where are all the witnesses? If her labia were groped, in public, wouldn't you expect there to be witnesses?
In fact, we don't need witnessese, since everything is recorded on the security cameras.
I've never experienced any TSA official being anything other than unfailingly apologetic and helpful. It is a rare moment in the entire experience of getting through the ordeal of flying, but I am always treated with dignity and respect. If only every aspect of flying were this humane.
Oh, and by the way, I am a mother, and my daughter has watched me go through this many times. It hasn't scarred her for life, just in case you are worried.
People, this is all gotten crazy. Seriously.
You need a citation? To verify that I'm telling the truth about my own experience? What on earth did I post that you need me to verify with a citation? Do I need a citation to prove I have a pacemaker? Do I need a citation to prove I have a daughter? That I've been through this procedure dozens of times, before the new procedures, and once since that point? Do I need a citation to show that the procedures were nothing like they're being described? Do I need a citation to prove that the TSA women who have screened me over the years have been polite and considerate?
I described my own experience. Please cut and paste what you need me to provide a citation for.
On the other hand, I would like to see a shred of corroboration that "mommy blogger" actually experienced what she's claiming.
Skepticism is a good thing, but maybe you should spread it around a little more evenly.
Do you mean have I ever been non-consensually groped? Yes, more than once. Do you mean have I ever been raped? No.
I'm assuming that if I can tell the difference between fairly mild physical sexual harassment and a professional security pat-down, I can tell the difference between a serious assault and a professional security pat-down.
I have a generous bust, which is attractive to gropers and occasionally makes airport security wonder if I've stuffed my bra with something I'm not supposed to take on a plane. There is a HUGE difference between being touched by a professional woman doing her job and being groped by a pervert getting his jollies.
No one here is claiming that abuses and bad apples don't exist. The fact that the NJ legislature is probing one is a sign that the system works to prevent and prosecute abuse.
It's possible that the video to which you refer is a case of a bad apple, who, I presume, will be fired and/or prosecuted. It's possible it's an issue of a temper-tantrum prone kid and bad parenting.
If we shut down every institution that ever had a bad apple, we'd have no police, fire department, registry of motor vehicles, schools, courts, or highways.
The machines are not pornographic and neither are any of the images. Pilots and crewmembers don't think that they should have to go through these machines because of the risks of radiation fallout.
We know our constitutional rights are being denied when we have no say so whatsoever over what or who may decide when and where our bodies are searched.
You didn't just talk about your own experience; you made a blanket statement that the alleged abuses were not happening to ANYONE. That's what I'm asking you to back up.
The fact that the NJ legislature is probing one is a sign that the system works to prevent and prosecute abuse.
It's proving no such thing, because so far at least, nothing is being prevented or prosecuted (remember, the NJ lege doesn't have jurisdiction over TSA policy, which is Federal). When people actually get fired, the porno-scans and other unreasonable invasions of privacy stop, and the "security" mantra no longer prevents people from being held accountable, THAT will be proof that the system is working.
Here's a question for all you folks who want to preach about "security:" what threat, EXACTLY, do the porno-scans and enhanced-harassment pat-downs address that no previous precaution addressed? For what incremental improvement are we giving up our (and our kids') privacy and dignity?
I don't feel threatened; I feel violated. As we all should.
Bullshit. I've seen some of the images, and when taken of the "right" kind of body, they can be downright HOT. They are clear, explicit naked pictures, plain and simple.
Adios.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/inverted-body-scanner-image-
shows-naked-body-in-full-living-color.html
BTW, the grope down is performed by same gender TSA personel (most of the time), but there are NO safeguards as to who is viewing the scanner image. It could be the biggest, fat slob pervert pig in the universe and you would have no way to know.
Screw it if someone calls this profiling butt, you can LOOK at them and see the sorts of people who have been hired dto do this.
Lokk at some random fattie(male and/or female) who struts around in the "get up" of authority.
They certainly do not belong in a position of authority, especially one that so impacts huamn beings' emtional healthy, dignity, rights, etc.
I'm sure some of you hove worked at a place(s) where someone assumes a postition of authorty and are nowhere near qualified to be there.
They overreact and bludgeon others in ways that are totally inappropriate.
This is exactly the sort of people who have sought out these jobs.
They do not belong in these positions of protection for abousers and, anyone who supports this situation has no right to their own opinions of those who object.
They might as well just donate to some town pervert's defense fund and, you KNOW who you are here.
Kudos to those sensible people in New Jersey.
The mere fact that such scans are already found, if used on minors, to be against one country's child-porn laws, should have been sufficient to kill the whole project. The fact that it hasn't, and it's being supported by people who are against all other forms of porn or nudity, speaks volumes about our current puslic discourse.