I hope that it is apparent to all that language is an important part of the human condition. We use it to reason with one another and we use it to praise each other. We use language to denounce each other as evidenced by the recent political campaigns. We use language to persuade each other. And in some cases we use language as a means of seduction. So I think it is fair to say that language is an important part of the human condition.
To an essayist, language is thoroughly vital. Without language, the essayist has nothing to offer. And so it is that this essayist tries to keep track of changes in the language spoken by the English-speaking people.
I came across a change in the language spoken by the English-speaking people recently quite by accident. You may recall that there is a raging controversy going on at this time with respect to security in the airline industry. The government and the airlines have invested heavily in body scanners that will reveal the naked form to the scanner so that he can detect bombs or hidden materials being brought aboard the airplane.
One of the drawbacks of the body scanners is the matter of radiation. A number of airline pilots who daily will pass through the scanners as many as four or five times have expressed great concern about the effects of radiation on their bodies. The authorities have dismissed this complaint as what the lawyers call “de minimis.” As one who has flown the airlines on many occasions, I would not be so quick to dismiss the effects of radiation as “de minimis.” In a more recent development, the authorities have now recognized that the pilots and their crews should be exempt from passing through the scanners.
Surely the airlines and the government wish to encourage the use of body scanners because the alternative is much more time consuming. If, for example, an airline passenger refuses to go through the body scanners which will reveal the naked form to the viewer, the authorities will insist that that passenger submit to a “pat down.” At this moment, the “pat downs” are a bit vigorous. The government authority in charge of the pat downs now calls them “enhanced pat downs.” Curiously, the word “enhanced” is the same word as is used by interrogators in the Iraq War to cover cases of torture. No one believes that the enhanced pat downs are necessarily torture but vigorous opposition has risen to them. One female passenger, for example, claimed that the person doing the pat downs actually put her hand on the upper leg of the proposed passenger. There have been other complaints about the enhanced pat down as it relates to the female breast. And then there are all of the concerns about body scanners showing the pictures of naked people where they may be examined by the curious.
So it appears that these days if you are going to fly in an airplane, you must not only remove your shoes and belts, but either submit to the body scan, which reveals the naked form to the viewer, or submit to the enhanced pat down. Now mind you, I have no prurient interest in these gory details. My interest has to do solely with the effect of the enhanced pat downs on the language that we use.
You see, recently a person described as some kind of minor television performer has told the person conducting the enhanced pat down, “If you touch my junk, I will sue.” I have no choice as a student of the language but to conclude that the word “junk’” refers to the genitals. For hundreds of years, the genitals have had proper names. Over the years, slang and vulgarisms have crept in with respect to the genitals but this old solder thought he knew all of the vulgar words having to do with euphemisms for the genitals. But I must confess that calling the genitals my “junk” is a new one on me. I have no idea where that word came from and I hope that it does not enter the mainstream of the English language. As a custodian of the proper use of the language, I am reporting this to you so that you may be aware the next time you fly of what “my junk” means.
In this respect, I believe that I am doing all of my readers a public service. While I have all kinds of sympathy for the air crews who must pass through the body scanners several times each day, I must also say that in my case if I were ever to fly again, I believe that I would tell the body scanner to get to work and to make it quick to reduce the effect of radiation. And I would tell the enhanced pat down artist that “junk” was not a proper usage for the grand and glorious language of the Anglo-Saxons.
E. E. CARR
November 20, 2010
Essay 512
~~~
Kevin’s commentary: I wish we still lived in the day where TSA agents looking at our junk was one of the top concerns when it came to privacy infringement. I suppose by this time the PATRIOT act had already been going for a while. But instead of fix that or keep the NSA from harvesting everyone’s data all the time, the government actually did take some action when it came to the scanners. There’s a screen on them now which shows what the TSA agents can see, and it’s basically just an outline of your body in green with anything out-of-place showing up in black. Seriously though they can see all they want of said junk so long as they can’t see into all of my data and I’d be happier. Ugh.