Ashley Judd Refers to being called “Sweetheart” & a Compliment about Her Dress as “Everyday Sexism”
Individuals who consider themselves progressive, liberal, Democrat, communist/socialist find offense in everything. From war memorials to flags to Christianity to opposing opinions and speech, some liberal progressive individual will find offense in it — guaranteed. But, when it comes to violations of individual God-given rights protected by the Constitution Bill of Rights, liberal progressives are all in to urge government to restrict or eradicate those for everyone else.
Case in point is Hollyweird actress Ashley Judd complaining about an airport security agent calling her “sweetheart” and saying, “Hey, nice dress” describing it as “everyday sexism,” which should be confronted.
Judd resorted to videoing a “live” post for Facebook describing the incident.
I’m traveling today, and this is the kind of thing to me that happens which I categorize as everyday sexism.
And it’s so easy to let it go, and not to speak up, particularly when it’s so easy for someone to push back and say, ‘Oh, I was just being polite,’ or something like that.
I’m coming through security and a guy said, ‘Hey sweetheart.’
And I said, ‘I’m not your sweetheart, I am your client’.
So I was already setting the boundary.
And then when I was setting my things out he said, ‘Hey, nice dress.’
I didn’t hear him saying anything about the attire of any of the other folks in the entire line.
And I am in one of the most traveled airports in the world.
I’m surrounded by lots and lots of other people in lots of different kinds of dress.
I set my stuff on the doo-hickey… you know, the doo-hickey that rolls.
And I was speaking with one of his colleagues who was saying ‘do you have on high heel shoes, whatever?’
And, guess what happened next?
He touched me.
I didn’t see him touch anybody else.
And, I turned around and said, ‘That was unnecessary.’
By the time, you know, my skin is burning, my feet are burning, it’s so hard to continue to set these boundaries when someone continues to push.
And then for good measure, he just said one more time ‘Have a good day sweetheart.’
Judd stated she was early for her flight, had plenty of time and would speak to a manager.
Before getting into her second live post on the exchange with the manager, one has to wonder if Judd proceeds through the same screening process as everyone else.
Initially, her offense occurred when a security agent called her “sweetheart.”
While his comments may have been unprofessional, she determined his comments to be an example of “everyday sexism.”
Wonder how many Hollyweird “stars” were standing in line around or behind Judd?
Likely, none, and he wanted to have an exchange with the Hollyweird liberal, receive a little attention and a smile or two.
Perhaps he wanted a story to tell his family about helping Ashley Judd through security. Who knows? As someone who does not support the TSA, any violation of individual God-given rights protected by the Constitution by any government agent or agency, or the passing of law or enforcement of policy/regulation that infringes or violates those rights, I find myself questioning whether this individual agent engaged in any violation.
As someone who does not support the TSA, any violation of individual God-given rights protected by the Constitution by any government agent or agency, or the passing of law or enforcement of policy/regulation that infringes or violates those rights, I find myself questioning whether this individual agent engaged in any violation.
She was upset at a security agent reaching out to touch her, possibly to get her attention, while airport security agents subject men, women, girls and boys to extreme pat down procedures by that would find any common individual arrested for sexual assault.
She is unfazed by airport security agents conducting sexual assault/rape pat-downs against adults and children, but takes a great deal of offense at being called “sweetheart” and being touched.
It’s obvious Judd does not go through the same screening process as the average individual – probably a TSA Pre-check client.
Yet, she doesn’t speak out against the rigorous pat-downs worthy of being called sexual assault against her fellow Americans and travelers.
In her mind, an airport security agent calling her “sweetheart” and paying her a compliment on her dress then touching her is grounds for lodging a complaint with a supervisor.
Most individuals would have responded with a “Thank You” and called it a day for breezing through airport security.
In her second video, detailing her interaction with the airport security manager, she stated the manager apologized for the agent’s comment then explained agents receive extensive uniform training instructing them to call an individual “sir” or “madam.”
She stated the manager informed her that touching someone was “totally inappropriate.”
Wait; what? Touching an individual is “inappropriate,” but conducting a sexual assault pat down in violation of the Fourth Amendment is acceptable?
Anyone else think this manager responded the way he did because the person complaining was some third-rate Hollyweird star exercising her “fame privilege”?
What a story to tell your family and friends – “Hey, guess who complained and I got to have a conversation with today? You will never guess… Ashley Judd. Yep, sure was.”
Then, the manager gave her two vouchers for coffee.
She was so traumatized by the incident, she felt the need to report it.
Yet, she videoed herself laughing after receiving vouchers for coffee for a live post on Facebook.
Individuals who have truly been traumatized by the sexual assault pat downs by the TSA, having their inherent right to be secure in their person from illegal search violated, are seen crying hours afterward and are visibly shaken by the experience when recalling it even months later.
They don’t get a “voucher” for anything. One can see that fame does indeed have its privileges.
This woman claimed Donald Trump winning the presidency was “the worst thing that has ever happened to me in my lifetime.”
Judd previously claimed to have been a victim of sexual assault and harassment perpetrated by a powerful Hollywood executive she refused to name. In an essay she penned for Mic, Judd claimed to be a “survivor of sexual assault, rape and incest.”
Who would have thought Donald Trump becoming president would be more horrible than being raped, a victim of sexual assault, and incest, according to Judd?
As someone who only flies once every five to ten years, has been subjected to the “naked” body scanner because of having titanium wires in the chest from thoracic surgery, having my checked luggage searched randomly by security personnel, and being guided gently through the line by a TSA agent touching my shoulder, it is frivolous for Judd to complain about receiving compliments from the agent or being touched.
She cares not about violations of the Fourth Amendment by government agents against US citizens; but, let a government agent engage in what she determines to be “everyday sexism” and she is all over Facebook reporting the incident and complaining to a manager.
Moreover, unless she was watching this agent continually for hours, she has no way of knowing how many he may have “touched.”
And, if touching an individual is totally inappropriate as that airport security manager claimed, why are individuals who fly subjected to sexual assault pat downs by TSA agents?
Not once did Judd engage her brain to see the contradiction in what the manager said.
Interesting that Judd never once provided the response by the agent when she “set the boundaries.”
Did he apologize? Did he not hear her? Did she not hear him because she was looking for something to add to her newfound “feminism” fame? Where is the response of the agent’s colleague who apparently had to hear and see the “touching” incident? Inquiring minds want to know the entire story – not just her side.
Judd, who supported Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election, followed the example set by Hillary in regards to “everyday sexism.”
As Breitbart reported, Clinton accused former White House press secretary Sean Spicer of “everyday sexism.”
As my mother always says, “You are judged by the company you keep”; and, “birds of a feather flock together.” Hillary Clinton is a known lawbreaker, criminal, liar, thief, and part of the Clinton Foundation crime family. Clinton views the Bill of Rights as items in the Constitution to be regulated and limited by
Hillary Clinton is a known lawbreaker, criminal, liar, thief, and part of the Clinton Foundation crime family. Clinton views the Bill of Rights as items in the Constitution to be regulated and limited by
Clinton views the Bill of Rights as items in the Constitution to be regulated and limited by government; she declared it was the government’s right to do so.
While liberals like Judd continually remind all of us about some sort of imagined privilege we possess, Judd actually has great privilege because of her fame.
As liberals tell us to “check our privilege,” Judd should realize she has “fame privilege” that should be recognized and “checked” before complaining about compliments paid to her by a TSA agent.
Furthermore, Judd should have provided the response of the agent to each of the “boundaries” she established, as well as the colleague of the agent who would have witnessed the “touching” encounter.
Judd could use her “fame privilege” to highlight the violations of the Fourth Amendment by government agents. But, that won’t happen.
Liberals care not if others’ rights are violated as long as it isn’t them and they benefit from their self-proclaimed “superiority privilege.”
If Judd was the victim of a violation of her individual God-given rights by any airport security personnel, then, by all means, inform the public.
Those of us who call out government for violating the Constitution will be all over it, standing up against those violations.
However, one should not use their “fame privilege” to complain about an agent who probably only wanted a few moments of attention; then, exercise some self-proclaimed “superiority privilege” to act as though a battle against a tremendous violation has been fought and won when most people would shrug off the incident.
Article by Suanne Hamner