A male passenger wearing little more than female undergarments was allowed to fly on US Airways recently even after a passenger had complained about him. The incident occurred several days after a black college football player was arrested in a dispute after a US Airways employee asked him to pull up his sagging pants.
These incidents are reminiscent of the story in 2007 when 23-year-old college student and Hooters restaurant waitress Kyla Ebbert went to board a Southwest Airlines jet in San Diego. She was denied entry by a flight attendant who found Ebbert’s micro-skirt outfit too provocative. It was not right for “a family airline,” the attendant said after receiving a complaint from a fellow employee.
But US Airways spokeswoman Valerie Wunder said this time that her airline’s employees had been correct not to ask the cross-dressing male to cover himself up, despite the complaint. “We don’t have a dress code policy,” Wunder said.
“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.”
This is a sham and is part of the relentless intimidation of decent Americans and of American business by leftist lawyers who are tightly linked to the Democrat party.
Said a passenger who wanted to document what she considered the inappropriate attire of the cross-dresser, “No one would believe me if I didn’t take his picture. It was unbelievable. … And he loved it. He posed for me.”
Yes, of course, he loved it. Because it was all a setup by one of the millions of sickos in America who get bolder by the day. Because he will become famous doing this stuff, even if only briefly. He will appear on CNN and on some daytime gab show. These people adore the attention because they are lonely, confused people.
Deshon Marman is the University of New Mexico football player who was pulled from an Albuquerque-bound flight. And the argument is being made that first that Marman was singled out because he is black, and second that Marman was not formally exposing himself in any way.
Sfgate.com reported that ‘Police have said only that Marman’s boxer shorts were exposed, and his attorney said surveillance video would prove Marman’s skin had not been visible.’ “It just shows the hypocrisy involved,” said Marman’s lawyer said after seeing the photo of the cross-dressing caucasian passenger. “They let a drag queen board a flight and welcomed him with open arms. Employees didn’t ask him to cover up. He didn’t have to talk to the pilot. They didn’t try to remove him from the plane — and many people would find his attire repugnant.”
OK, so here we got into Alice’s Wonderland of Civil Liberties and Political Correctness as our nation descends into the gutter arguing over whether a passenger’s skin was showing as he allowed his pants to fall down. Or whether a male in female undergarments is just another good citizen on his way to grandma’s house, with full Constitutional rights in tow.
This is indicative of the decline and fall of decency in America at the hands of the civil libertarian left.
Remember the famous old movie line: “Have you no decency, sir!?” And of course that line is always supposed to be directed at some evil right-wing conservative or politician who deigns to question the legality or propriety of any given degenerate behavior.
Yet our whole national behavior is out of control thanks to the Democrat left and its penchant for defending any behavior or dress code as “free speech” and “freedom of expression”.
After the Kyla Ebbert incident was splashed all over the media, the usual suspects chimed in with eye-rolling indignation. Feminists speculated that we were going to roll back the clock on ‘women’s rights’ and liberals vowed that no person shall be restrained on the basis of their appearance.
But Chris Mains, a Southwest spokesman, stood fast at the time saying, “We don’t feel our employee was in the wrong.” And good for you and Southwest, Mr. (Mrs.) (Ms.) Mains.
Realizing that she had a publicity tiger by the tail, Ebbert appeared repeatedly for media photo shoots and opinion sessions. Yet in one seated internet pose, Ebbert had her legs artfully crossed because the outfit easily would have allowed any casual viewer to look up her skirt.
So Ms. Ebbert: Why were your legs crossed? What were you afraid of exposing? Was your outfit in fact not pure provocation? And can such outright provocation not be barred by a private business with decency in mind?
These incidents bring to mind the case of the young black males in Louisiana allowing their pants to hang down in public, exposing their underwear, and a local effort to legislate against it. The civil libertarians on the anything-goes left have argued that it not your business how a person looks.
Yet that indeed is the crux of the issue, because it absolutely is your business when it is in the public domain. That is why towns have ordinances against public nudity and other odious behaviors. In your private home or apartment, you may do whatever you want to do. In public and in our private establishments, however, you have a duty to respect public standards, or the standards set by that business.
But in today’s world, where environmentalists are legislating how, when and where you may alter your own private property; in a world where public health officials can tell you whether people can smoke cigarettes in your private bar or restaurant; in a world where private businesses are insistently legislated and litigated over how they may deal with their employees, customers and anyone else, we have a real dichotomy.
Because those same liberals are increasingly adamant that there are virtually no restrictions on personal behavior in public, that a young male may expose his underwear in the public square, and that any female like Ebbert may dress as she wishes on the public streets, with no regard for decency or offense. That we all just have to “get used to it”.
And now – and here’s the rub – these liberals are trying to shove more and more of these unrestricted personal ‘rights’ first in the public domain and then into the private domain (airlines, restaurants) at the very same time they are trying to restrict genuine private property rights (cutting trees, erecting buildings, allowing customers to smoke in a restaurant etc.).
And it all adds up to one thing: Total government power over all property — both public and private — with no regard for rights or opinion… except that of government. Our free society has a written and unwritten understanding of “rights”. Yet despite the Constitution’s guaranteed right of free speech, you may not shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater. And despite our one-time respect for private property rights, today we have allowed rabid zoning regulations and zealous environmentalism increasingly to encroach on those rights. So where do we draw the line? At what point can we say that “rights” may be curtailed?
This all concerns what Thomas Jefferson said was the crucial “will of the majority”, with the rights of the minority protected. And Ebbert (the minority) has the right to dress however she wishes, and her right must be protected. But in the public square that she crosses, and particularly in private establishments (passenger jets), she should expect to be judged by the people she encounters. And with her provocative style, Ebbert could have expected plenty of reaction.
Because many decent people in the American majority are fed up with the low bar of decency that has descended on our nation. From network television trash to easily available pornography, many are simply fed up. The Southwest Airlines employee who lodged the initial complaint may have been a conservative Christian, or a disgusted parent who is tired of the half-dressed females that her children are encountering every day at the mall.
Southwest Airlines acted responsibly and within its rights. So did US Airway in the sagging pants incident. But to allow the cross-dresser access to the skies is a sure sign of incremental erosion in our public standards of decency and incremental intimidation by the ACLU left. The media will relentlessly titter about the prudish nature of Southwest and are trying to use intimidation and shaming tactics against the airline and against good Americans.
So how about if we conservatives fight back, with property owners across America suing Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and their local enviro organizations for their endless restrictions on our basic right to do what we wish with our own private property. Then the playing field will be leveled out.
Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com com for more. Watch for the new and exciting nikitas3.com in the coming week!