6 ms·

You say that like feelings are something not worth discussing.

by nyreed 10y ago

the-dude 10y ago
I knew my comment would be countered like this. I don't think they are not worth discussing, but the title of the piece is pretty sensational. I just commented there are no facts, nothing was real. She felt the way she did. Sure. But travel has been this way 15+ years now. edit:typos
- bakul 10y ago
  Rafia is a she. Not that it changes anything. This fear is much worse now. Watching what you say, the language you speak, books you read, what may be on your computers/phone, your demeanor, etc. Because of that fear she tried to remove anything that may signal she is a Muslim to the CBP. That makes the title not sensational. [But it didn't work as they still asked her if she was a Muslim.]
  - the-dude 10y ago
    It does not change anything, but it explains a lot.
    - romwell 10y ago
      I'd be curious to know what exactly this explained.
- romwell 10y ago
  First, it's "she", not "he". If you don't care about the gender of the author (inferrable from the name), write "they". Secondly, no, the travel has not been the same even in the post-9/11 world. The change is that they are now talking about demanding passwords to social networks, and search your entire history of communication. The change is that now you really are presumed criminal and have to prove otherwise with how you look, speak, and what information you have or looked at. The change is that now you really do have to go through your emails and censor them. If that's not substance to you, we don't have anything to discuss, so let's stop here. I value your comments, however, because they supplement the article and do further author's point.
  - romwell 10y ago
    Since the edit time has lapsed, I want to clarify that the OP has originally referred to the author as "he", but has edited his post when it was specified to them (good!). This is a nontrivial point; OP's opinions are affected by gender. Upon learning that the author is a woman, the OP stated that it "explains a lot" (as of the time of writing this, we're still waiting to know what exactly).
- crispyambulance 10y ago
  "Facts" are only part of any story and, more importantly, you can NEVER have all of the facts and there's no guarantee that the most important facts are even known. If you really want facts, consider what would happen if the journalist had tried to get them from a lizard-brain CBP officer as she's being asked weird intrusive questions and who could, on a whim, detain her at the airport with no rights to communicate with anyone-- for no one actually knows how long. The story was an insightful thought piece that might help others understand the situation better or perhaps provide a bit of illumination on why some people may be terrified of travel in the current environment.
Consultant32452 10y ago
I personally don't care to discuss the feelings of strangers. It seems silly to do. In this context the feelings of some strangers is really only valuable to me if the feelings are justified by data. If there's reasonable evidence that can be shown that the feelings are justified, then I'm happy to get on board to help resolve the issue. If you just want to whine about your feelings, talk to someone who is emotionally close to you.
- komali2 10y ago
  My black friend and I had a candid conversation about racism once, and he told me something along the lines of: "racism can make you a crazy person. A guy will walk into a room and say hi to everyone but you, and you'll wonder, was that racism? Or maybe that dude just didn't see me? You'll order a sandwich and the white girl behind the counter is flippant, you think, was that racism or was she just having a bad day? She's nice to the next dude in line, maybe they know each other, or is it cause he's white?" Humans are emotional creatures and social science is very much not-so-scientific at times, considering the complexity of the topic. Sometimes all we can do is talk about our feelings.
  - Consultant32452 10y ago
    I'm not interested until we get to the point where we, as a culture, are willing to tell people that their feelings are unjustified in sensitive areas. And here I'm talking about general public discussions. If you're emotionally close to someone then of course be empathetic. If you want the general public to listen then you'd better be prepared to put up or shut up with regards to data. If you just want to talk about your feels with no justification whatsoever, there's plenty of platforms out there for fiction writing.
    - komali2 10y ago
      > If you want the general public to listen then you'd better be prepared to put up or shut up with regards to data. How does your argument stand in the Trump era, when a candidate can lie outright but appeal to feelings well enough to be elected president? When republicans can get on TV and say "we're about feelings, not facts"? The reality of the world does not reflect your personal opinion of what the world should be like.
dragandj 10y ago
In this case, her feelings are simply not particularly interesting or special, at least to me. She's a muslim citizen of United States. On her way home from Europe, she was afraid that she'd be searched and somehow molested by the authorities. The whole time she describes this or that detail of the process and imagines how it could go wrong for her. But nothing happens. And that's it.
- romwell 10y ago
  Well, that's not it. Something happens to others, e.g. this: http://fortune.com/2017/03/01/nigerian-software-engineer-detained/ http://fortune.com/2017/03/01/nigerian-software-engineer-det... The point is, this behavior towards people coming into the country affects even those who are not searched. They live in fear. That's not "nothing". If you start kicking red-haired people in the street, and only 5% of red-haired people get kicked due to their red hair, the experience of the rest doesn't amount to "nothing".

You say that like feelings are something not worth discussing.

by nyreed 10y ago

You say that like feelings are something not worth discussing.

I knew my comment would be countered like this. I don't think they are not worth discussing, but the title of the piece is pretty sensational. I just commented there are no facts, nothing was real. She felt the way she did. Sure. But travel has been this way 15+ years now. edit:typos

bakul 10y ago
Rafia is a she. Not that it changes anything. This fear is much worse now. Watching what you say, the language you speak, books you read, what may be on your computers/phone, your demeanor, etc. Because of that fear she tried to remove anything that may signal she is a Muslim to the CBP. That makes the title not sensational. [But it didn't work as they still asked her if she was a Muslim.]
- the-dude 10y ago
  It does not change anything, but it explains a lot.
  - romwell 10y ago
    I'd be curious to know what exactly this explained.
romwell 10y ago
First, it's "she", not "he". If you don't care about the gender of the author (inferrable from the name), write "they". Secondly, no, the travel has not been the same even in the post-9/11 world. The change is that they are now talking about demanding passwords to social networks, and search your entire history of communication. The change is that now you really are presumed criminal and have to prove otherwise with how you look, speak, and what information you have or looked at. The change is that now you really do have to go through your emails and censor them. If that's not substance to you, we don't have anything to discuss, so let's stop here. I value your comments, however, because they supplement the article and do further author's point.
- romwell 10y ago
  Since the edit time has lapsed, I want to clarify that the OP has originally referred to the author as "he", but has edited his post when it was specified to them (good!). This is a nontrivial point; OP's opinions are affected by gender. Upon learning that the author is a woman, the OP stated that it "explains a lot" (as of the time of writing this, we're still waiting to know what exactly).
crispyambulance 10y ago
"Facts" are only part of any story and, more importantly, you can NEVER have all of the facts and there's no guarantee that the most important facts are even known. If you really want facts, consider what would happen if the journalist had tried to get them from a lizard-brain CBP officer as she's being asked weird intrusive questions and who could, on a whim, detain her at the airport with no rights to communicate with anyone-- for no one actually knows how long. The story was an insightful thought piece that might help others understand the situation better or perhaps provide a bit of illumination on why some people may be terrified of travel in the current environment.

Consultant32452 10y ago

I personally don't care to discuss the feelings of strangers. It seems silly to do. In this context the feelings of some strangers is really only valuable to me if the feelings are justified by data. If there's reasonable evidence that can be shown that the feelings are justified, then I'm happy to get on board to help resolve the issue. If you just want to whine about your feelings, talk to someone who is emotionally close to you.

komali2 10y ago
My black friend and I had a candid conversation about racism once, and he told me something along the lines of: "racism can make you a crazy person. A guy will walk into a room and say hi to everyone but you, and you'll wonder, was that racism? Or maybe that dude just didn't see me? You'll order a sandwich and the white girl behind the counter is flippant, you think, was that racism or was she just having a bad day? She's nice to the next dude in line, maybe they know each other, or is it cause he's white?" Humans are emotional creatures and social science is very much not-so-scientific at times, considering the complexity of the topic. Sometimes all we can do is talk about our feelings.
- Consultant32452 10y ago
  I'm not interested until we get to the point where we, as a culture, are willing to tell people that their feelings are unjustified in sensitive areas. And here I'm talking about general public discussions. If you're emotionally close to someone then of course be empathetic. If you want the general public to listen then you'd better be prepared to put up or shut up with regards to data. If you just want to talk about your feels with no justification whatsoever, there's plenty of platforms out there for fiction writing.
  - komali2 10y ago
    > If you want the general public to listen then you'd better be prepared to put up or shut up with regards to data. How does your argument stand in the Trump era, when a candidate can lie outright but appeal to feelings well enough to be elected president? When republicans can get on TV and say "we're about feelings, not facts"? The reality of the world does not reflect your personal opinion of what the world should be like.

dragandj 10y ago

In this case, her feelings are simply not particularly interesting or special, at least to me. She's a muslim citizen of United States. On her way home from Europe, she was afraid that she'd be searched and somehow molested by the authorities. The whole time she describes this or that detail of the process and imagines how it could go wrong for her. But nothing happens. And that's it.

romwell 10y ago
Well, that's not it. Something happens to others, e.g. this: http://fortune.com/2017/03/01/nigerian-software-engineer-detained/ http://fortune.com/2017/03/01/nigerian-software-engineer-det... The point is, this behavior towards people coming into the country affects even those who are not searched. They live in fear. That's not "nothing". If you start kicking red-haired people in the street, and only 5% of red-haired people get kicked due to their red hair, the experience of the rest doesn't amount to "nothing".