Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Was a Man in Panties and a Bra Allowed to Fly?
Townhall.com ^ | June 28, 2011 | Dennis Prager

Posted on 06/28/2011 6:57:30 AM PDT by Kaslin

On June 9, a man boarded a US Airways flight from Fort Lauderdale to Phoenix, dressed in women's panties, a bra and thigh-high stockings.

No US Airways employee at the Fort Lauderdale airport asked him to cover himself. Nor did any flight attendant ask him to do so. And obviously, no one demanded that he get off the plane.

US Airways spokeswoman Valerie Wunder was asked how the airline allowed a nearly naked cross-dresser to board a plane and sit next to other passengers who, one assumes, did not appreciate being seated next to an exhibitionist.

As reported by the San Francisco Examiner, she "said employees had been correct not to ask the man to cover himself. 'We don't have a dress code policy. Obviously, if their private parts are exposed, that's not appropriate. ... So if they're not exposing their private parts, they're allowed to fly.'"

The decline of American civilization since the 1960s has been so fast and so dramatic that it takes one's breath away.

That a woman speaking on behalf of a major airline can say with a straight face that her airline allows anyone dressed or undressed to fly on its airplanes so long as they do not expose their genitals perfectly encapsulates this decline.

The only question is: How did we get here?

For one thing, the concept of decency is dying. I suspect that if an adult were to say to a group of randomly chosen American college students that this man indecently exposed himself and should not have been allowed to fly, that adult would be a) not understood -- what does "indecent" mean? -- and/or b) roundly condemned for intolerance and bigotry.

To judge this man as acting indecently, not to mention to bar him from flying, is to engage in violating the only values a generation of Americans has been taught: not to judge, not to discriminate, to welcome diversity and to fully accept those who are different, especially in the sexual arena.

That is why I think it is very difficult to have a dialogue on this matter. For those who believe in public "decency," the matter is as clear as a bell -- this was profoundly indecent -- and for those who do not believe in such a concept, the matter is equally clear -- "decency" is an anachronism.

One caller to my radio talk show simply could not see what was so bad about what the man did and that US Airways allowed him to fly. I asked my caller if he thought an airline should ban naked passengers. While he acknowledged that public nudity is against the law, he saw no reason that it should be so. Basically, I suspect that in my caller's view, my opposition to this man being allowed to fly constituted a "hang up."

So the god of tolerance is one reason for the death of the concept of "public decency."

Another is the age of secularism in which we live. In a more religious America, the human being was regarded as created in God's image, a being that ideally aspires to a level of holiness. As secularism proceeds with the increasing force of an avalanche, however, man is increasingly regarded as just another animal.

One way in which higher civilizations have demonstrated the human-animal difference has been the wearing of clothing. Animals are naked in public; humans are clothed. But secularism eats away at such religious ideals. Thus religion-based concepts such as holiness and decency die out. You can see it in the widespread acceptance of public cursing as well as in public exhibitionism, among many other manifestations.

I don't know if US Airways is alone among airlines in allowing anyone to fly as long as their genitals are covered. But it seems to me that if restaurants can post dress codes and announce that they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, an airline -- in which people, unlike in restaurants, are forced to sit two inches from strangers -- should be able to do so.

In the meantime, this is the Brave New World that mindless tolerance, diversity and lawsuits on their behalf have wrought.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last

1 posted on 06/28/2011 6:57:31 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

As the old man on Pawn Stars said.

Used to be that flying was an event and people dressed up for it.


2 posted on 06/28/2011 6:59:58 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Sorry....That’s lewd conduct. He should have gone to jail.


3 posted on 06/28/2011 7:01:36 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The black kid with the sagging pants that was booted off a US Air flight a few days earlier has a good case for a racial discrimination lawsuit.


4 posted on 06/28/2011 7:02:12 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The only intolerance that is tolerated today is that which is directed toward normality.


5 posted on 06/28/2011 7:02:26 AM PDT by Humble Servant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; All
"Why Was a Man in Panties and a Bra Allowed to Fly?"


6 posted on 06/28/2011 7:03:13 AM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I had a discussion with an old high school friend over this (he lives in Austin and fits in quite well). He thought that perhaps it’s society that has the problem, since this man was obviously comfortable in his own skin....and lack of clothing. Perhaps we should look deeper into our own issues to find what makes us uncomfortable.

I told him the fact that we can be having a discussion about whether or not a man wearing women’s underwear (only) on a public airline is ok, is incredible. The fact that he could find any way to defend it just tells me...we have absolutely nothing further to discuss.


7 posted on 06/28/2011 7:03:43 AM PDT by HGSW0904
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Reminds me of:

“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.”

- G.K. Chesteron.
8 posted on 06/28/2011 7:03:52 AM PDT by mrmeyer ("When brute force is on the march, compromise is the red carpet." Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

A woman in that get-up would have been booted off the plane.


9 posted on 06/28/2011 7:04:06 AM PDT by SMARTY ("Educate men without religion and you make of them but clever devils. " Arthur Wellesley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Why Was a Man in Panties and a Bra Allowed to Fly?

____________________________

Well, to be fair, they were a very expensive and matching pair of underwear. That ought to count for something, right?

/SARCASM!!!


10 posted on 06/28/2011 7:04:48 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I'm a Birther - And a Deather)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
2 weeks ago some punk was tossed off a SouthWest flight for having his pants down by his knees. The flight attendents said that he was asked to pull up his sagging pajama pants before his U.S. Airways could continue boarding. The pilot ordered all passengers off the plane and the kid was booted off.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2735761/posts

So how is it this freak was allowed to fly in panties and bra unchallenged??

11 posted on 06/28/2011 7:05:43 AM PDT by corkoman (Steadfast and Loyal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Would the airline have allowed a woman to board the plane if dressed the same way? I suspect that airport police would have stopped such a person from getting anywhere near the gate.

The article does not say anything about objections from any of the other pasengers. Have the sheep become that tame?


12 posted on 06/28/2011 7:05:43 AM PDT by Pecos (Constitutionalist. Liberty and Honor will not die on my watch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

I think, in the hierarchy of political correctness, “homo” trumps “black”.

Remember, political correctness is only the current name for “cultural marxism”. The crossdressing deviant destroys our culture faster and better than sagging pants.


13 posted on 06/28/2011 7:06:03 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I remember the Catholic Church always telling us as children to remember that “our body was a temple.” I never forgot that admonition. I’ve ignored it on occasion but never forgotten it. It makes me sad and angry to see the horribly inappropriate clothes worn by people on the streets of NYC, the tattoos on young girls, the bizarre haircuts, the cross-dressing...

In suburbia it’s not much better. There is a weird habit now of men going into our bagel shop on Saturday morning dressed...get this...in pajamas.


14 posted on 06/28/2011 7:06:27 AM PDT by miss marmelstein (FR haters of Sarah Palin are wearing me out)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Points to the TSA on this one. The dude was obviously not a bomb-toting Muslim.
15 posted on 06/28/2011 7:06:39 AM PDT by Redcloak (What's your zombie plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
One way in which higher civilizations have demonstrated the human-animal difference has been the wearing of clothing. Animals are naked in public; humans are clothed. But secularism eats away at such religious ideals.

The crux of the matter. Once you reject any possibility of a higher authority, there is no logical reason why one person's preference in behavior should be considered superior to another person's preference.

What IS the logical (not emotional) reason for prohibiting public nudity? Or public coitus? Or any other behavior that does not directly touch another person?

16 posted on 06/28/2011 7:07:15 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If I was there with my child - and she would have surely asked questions - I would have loudly proclaimed:

“That, honey, is a very, very sick man. You should stay away. He’s most likely dangerous and a child molester.”


17 posted on 06/28/2011 7:07:49 AM PDT by bolobaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Never mind flying: people used to dress for casual public appearances like baseball games, and did so out of respect for themselves and others:


18 posted on 06/28/2011 7:09:25 AM PDT by andy58-in-nh (America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

You’re right, he does. But I suspect if that black kid had shown up in panties and bra instead of rap gear he probably wouldn’t have been hassled. This is about society’s politically correct embrace of sexual freakishness rather than race, imo.


19 posted on 06/28/2011 7:10:17 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HGSW0904
I told him the fact that we can be having a discussion about whether or not a man wearing women’s underwear (only) on a public airline is ok, is incredible. The fact that he could find any way to defend it just tells me...we have absolutely nothing further to discuss.

I no longer keep up with my old college friends. They are all leftist, godless America-bashing commies. I got a Facebook invitation from one. I looked at his profile and saw that his favorite show was Rachel Maddow. I passed on "friending" him. We are at war now, and I have no stomach for traitors.

20 posted on 06/28/2011 7:10:30 AM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson