I’ve seen litigation where it comes back like that, wizardpc. “Can we make the plaintiff give the defendant money, even though they didn’t countersue?”
Sad part: The gov’t does not see the hypocrisy of charging a woman for “groping” the TSA agent whilst allowing the TSA agent to grope the woman.
FYI: The poor woman in this case is only 5 ft tall and was surrounded by TSA and security people. Yeah, I’d probably feel intimidated & defensive too.
I seem to remember some talking points about sexual assault not being so much about sex, but power. The argument is sometimes extended to the point of saying that sex between a supervisory male and a junior female is still rape due to the power discrepancy, even to the point of completely discounting consent on the part of the female (although this rapidly degenerates into a nonsense argument that requires one to posit non-sapience of the female).
Using that argument structure, however, is it possible that a screenee could ever really consent to sexual assault level screening practices when the screener has the force of law, the authority of office, the circumstances of the location, the crowd pressure of the people behind her in line and the gang-up effect of the TSA screener’s co-perpetrators?
July 20th, 2011 at 10:56 am
Hope she still takes it to jury trial…
July 20th, 2011 at 10:56 am
Two words: Jury Nullification.
July 20th, 2011 at 11:14 am
I’d love to see the foreman come back and ask “Can we convict the TSA agent instead?”
July 20th, 2011 at 12:31 pm
I’ve seen litigation where it comes back like that, wizardpc. “Can we make the plaintiff give the defendant money, even though they didn’t countersue?”
July 20th, 2011 at 12:58 pm
Sad part: The gov’t does not see the hypocrisy of charging a woman for “groping” the TSA agent whilst allowing the TSA agent to grope the woman.
FYI: The poor woman in this case is only 5 ft tall and was surrounded by TSA and security people. Yeah, I’d probably feel intimidated & defensive too.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:10 pm
Yeah, but I wonder how fast they’ll put her on a “Do Not Fly” list? Payback is a bitch.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
I seem to remember some talking points about sexual assault not being so much about sex, but power. The argument is sometimes extended to the point of saying that sex between a supervisory male and a junior female is still rape due to the power discrepancy, even to the point of completely discounting consent on the part of the female (although this rapidly degenerates into a nonsense argument that requires one to posit non-sapience of the female).
Using that argument structure, however, is it possible that a screenee could ever really consent to sexual assault level screening practices when the screener has the force of law, the authority of office, the circumstances of the location, the crowd pressure of the people behind her in line and the gang-up effect of the TSA screener’s co-perpetrators?
July 20th, 2011 at 7:03 pm
That’s great for her. I wonder how it would have turned out had she been born penis-ed.