A Tale of Two Piercings


I can’t decide if this is just funny, stupid, irritating or all of the above.

Lawyer: Woman Forced to Remove Nipple Rings at Airport

This even reeks to me of attention-getting for the woman and the lawyer, Gloria Allred.

Basically, this woman wears nipple rings under her shirt to get on a flight.  She sets off the metal detector.  She asks to just “show” a woman TSA agent, but instead is asked to remove them.  She removed them–with some issues that ultimately required pliers (OUCH!).

Her gripe is she was humiliated and demands an apology.

A few thoughts:

Hamlin said she heard male TSA agents snickering as she took out the ring.

Well, hells bells, you wear the nipple piercings for attention—you get the attention you seek and then demand an apology…hello?

“After nipple rings are inserted, the skin can often heal around the piercing, and the rings can be extremely difficult and painful to remove,” Allred said in the letter.

Well, maybe — just, maybe — that is natures way of saying STOP POKING YOUR NIPPLES WITH METAL!   I’m just sayin’.

Hamlin was publicly humiliated and has “undergone an enormous amount of physical pain to have the nipple rings reinserted” because of scar tissue, Allred said.

Why would you do that?  (And get a clue….see above about what nature is telling you) 

And finally, the dumb lawyer quote of the day:

“The conduct of TSA was cruel and unnecessary,” Allred wrote. “The last time that I checked a nipple was not a dangerous weapon.”

No, not unless you are an evil fem-bot in an Austin Powers movie. 

What is dangerous and irritating are publicity seeking lawyers  and those who think the rules don’t apply to them (ie. the rules for boarding a plane and going through metal detectors)!

Advertisements

One Response

  1. The TSA is populated by idiots. This is but one example. As with most government organizations, common sense often takes a permenant holiday.

    I don’t care about the nipple rings one way or the other, and that’s beside the point anyway. Once the reason for the detector going off is established, and the reason deemed harmless, that should be the end of it. A visual inspection done privately should have sufficed. People wear medical devices that can set off detectors. Should they have to remove those?

    Add this to the shaking down of old women and babies as things that piss me off about airport inspections. They are distracting themselves from legitimate threats. This is an instance where I applaud Gloria Allred. Without the “attention getting” nature of her practice, we would all be increasingly subject to such idiocy and be made less secure in the process.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: