This thread is really disappointing. I was initially excited to see this thread because I kind of like strip searches. I come here to get off, not argue about politics-which like it or not is what this is. Since this discussion is in the "anything related" forum I guess I don't have much room to complain, but I'm a little disappointed nonetheless.
But to weigh in on the debate that we seem to be having about the morality of fantasy versus reality, let me submit the following. First of all, in general, for some reason I find myself to be rather resentful of authority. Perhaps that is a character flaw on my part but that resentment extends to government in general and law enforcement specifically. I'm not that old, but it appears to me that America is increasingly devolving into a police state. I could go on and on as to why that may be and why I feel that way, but it is neither on topic nor necessarily germane to this discussion. Suffice it to say that the increasingly heavy handed, invasive and in my opinion frequently unconstitutional practices of law enforcement lead me to view the so called profession in nearly all its incarnations with considerable suspicion and an increasing measure of contempt. The bottom line is that a lot of the shit that US law enforcement does is heavy handed and wrong. Just go out onto You Tube and you can watch all the police abuse you want. A significant portion of Americans don't like it. However, not enough of us are unhappy about it to get it changed. Although to keep things in their proper perspective, You Tube also has videos taken in other countries where it appears to be acceptable for armed groups to publicly hack the heads off of people who they don't like. So it seems that there is something to be said for the rule of law, its just a question of how much law is appropriate. Perhaps things aren't so bad here after all, but I digress.
As it relates to this particular incident, there was no good reason for law enforcement to do what they did. Some reports claim that this woman was cavity searched, which I think is incorrect. At most, they may have made her spread her vagina and/or anus, but a cavity search requires penetration and I doubt that happened as it typically requires a court order and is performed by a medical professional. So I think there is some confusion over terminology here. As a pretext for the search, they cited policy, like they always do, but that doesn't make it right, it just means that they abuse everybody equally. And I sincerely doubt they did anything more or less in this case than they do in any other. It surprises me though that there was a strip search at all unless she was not expected to be released on bail. By my understanding, a strip search is not normally performed unless a) they have probable cause and are looking for something specific (like drugs) which seems unlikely in this case, or b) you're going to be there for a while and won't be released on bail, which is possible if this person was considered a flight risk because of her connection and privileged status with a foreign country.
However, I like strip searches every bit as much as pelvic exams. I have no idea why that is. Why I find these situations erotic is every bit as much a mystery to me as why some people get turned on by wearing diapers, or getting kicked in the balls or sucking toes. But there is a lot of similarity between pelvic exams and strip searches. They both involve an element of submission, exposure and even exhibitionism. The biggest difference between them is the level of consent. There are plenty of spy cam gyno exams out there. Is it just as wrong to watch those as it is to fantasize about this poor woman's strip search? If it's wrong to fantasize about a real strip search or voyeured gyno exam, is it wrong to fantasize about any other person without their express consent to do so? I am quite sure that none of the thousands of real women I've filled my head with in the many years since I was in eighth grade were interested in being a part of my sexual fantasies. In that regard, it is very easy to make an argument that I have violated them all. But I think we all know that that line of reasoning is bogus. I can't say if there is a threshold of morality in there anywhere or not. However, I do know that it is wrong to film a a woman's pelvic exam without the consent of everybody involved. But that doesn't seem to stop anybody from enjoying those kind of videos when they turn up. I believe it was equally wrong for law enforcement to have treated this woman this way. Apparently, that doesn't seem to be stopping many of us from talking about the erotic element of the situation. But when you get right down to it, in both of these situations, the blood is on the hands of the people who did this, not on any of us perverts who just happen to get turned on by something a little bit more exotic than missionary position heterosexual intercourse. So as I see it, if you're comfortable fantasizing about either one of these real events, go right ahead. If you're less than comfortable, nobody is forcing you to think about it or to participate in any related discussion. But the reality of the situation is that the damage is done and its been done by somebody else. If somebody gets off on a situation like this it isn't hurting anybody at this point.
However, I think it is important to note something. Lets talk about the the law and order people. You know who I mean-the people who generally support aggressive law enforcement and expansive police powers. You know, the same people who don't want you smoking marijuana, watching pornography, having sex outside of marriage, listening to rock music, being gay, having forums like this where we talk about fetishes and so forth. Be careful what you berate your fellow fetishist for thinking or getting off over. In doing so, you bear a striking similarity and play into the hands of the same crowd that would be exceptionally pleased to put an end to all the fun we have here. So to conclude my thoughts, unless somebody is being hurt by what somebody is doing or saying, I suggest that we all refrain from criticizing each others proclivities on moral or ethical grounds because as far as I can tell, there is not a single one of us that has a leg to stand on in that regard.