Where does
'public space' end and 'my space'
begin?
Sanitizing all
public spaces smells a bit like
government regulation of private
lives.
By Jill
Rachel Jacobs
Christian Science Monitor,
April 14, 2006 edition
NEW YORK
– Anyone who
has flown the friendly skies of
late may have noticed a disturbing
trend. I'm not referring to the
endless post-9/11 security checks
we've all come to expect, where
shoes, tweezers, laptops, nail
files, and a variety of other
formerly nonthreatening items now
double as WMD.
But there's
another war brewing - a new terror
in the skies. It's the war on nut
snacks. And it could get ugly.
While the
peanut war is not exactly a new
conflict, (some schools have
outlawed the nut in an attempt to
minimize risks to peanut allergy
sufferers), the latest brouhaha
surrounding this popular legume
has once again reared its ugly
head, surfacing 30,000 feet up
where peanut allergy sufferers and
airlines may come to blows once
again.
The last highly
publicized firestorm targeting the
peanut was back in 1998, when the
government introduced legislation
requiring "peanut-free buffer
zones" on all flights (at least
three rows for passengers who
document severe allergy to
peanuts). But much to the dismay
of the peanut allergy sufferer who
remains at risk for an attack or
even possible death just from
being in the same room with peanut
dust, that bill was nixed in the
11th hour.
Currently, there
are no established guidelines
within the airline industry
regarding peanuts and peanut
allergies. Rather, airlines have
established their own protocol of
varying degrees, from peanut
snacks to no tree-nut products at
all allowed on board.
Anecdotal reports
from recent flights confirm the
lack of uniformity among different
airlines. New York City frequent
flier Jeff Gold was privy to the
route some airlines have chosen in
an effort to address the needs of
peanut allergy sufferers.
During his JetBlue
flight from JFK airport to West
Palm Beach, Fla., last month, Mr.
Gold was surprised to hear an
additional announcement following
the preflight emergency
instructions: "This is a
peanut-free flight," the airline
attendant warned, requesting that
anyone with any peanut products
refrain from opening them while on
board.
After Mr. Gold
reluctantly retired his contraband
Snickers bar, he wondered if
everyone would be as cooperative,
recalling the dissension that
ensued among New Yorkers after
smokers and nonsmokers took their
respective corners and came out
swinging at the inception of the
citywide ban imposed on smoking in
public venues. Smokers complained
that their rights were violated
after the controversial decision
made by city officials, stirring a
heated debate about government
intervention in the private lives
of its citizens.
"What about
perfumes and environmental
allergies? How about Democrats who
are allergic to Republicans?" Gold
quipped. "Will the government
someday step in and oversee how we
deal with these intrusions?"
Gold may not get
his wish regarding the segregation
of political parties, but perfumes
may in fact soon be history for
one Massachusetts high school. The
Upper Cape Cod Regional Technical
School Committee recently met to
consider the establishment of a
fragrance-free school policy.
Superintendent Barry Motta
initiated the proposal after
receiving numerous complaints by
staff and students claiming a host
of symptoms after exposure to
fragrances. The ban would outlaw
colognes, perfumes, scented
deodorants, and body sprays.
It's
understandable that those who
suffer a reaction induced by
scents would welcome the
establishment of fragrance-free
zones. But high school students
entering that tenuous
developmental stage, where
rebellion, coupled with an
increased awareness of their
olfactory senses, may be hard
pressed to follow the acrid
proposal. Not to mention the hit
the fragrance industry could take
if unable to target its teen
demographic.
While libraries
and government offices have
already established fragrance-free
policies, the cynic in me wonders,
what's next? Could mass transit,
movies, theater, sporting events,
and any group activity performed
in an enclosed space be far
behind? I wonder what happens to
those unwilling to go au naturel
when it comes to body odor. Would
those in favor of donning scents
attempt to propose their own
ordinance that would require the
not-so-fresh smelling to pay some
sort of fine, too?
Though nice in
theory, bans are not always easily
implemented. In 2002, New York
City's attempted indoor cellphone
ban was not approved, while a
citywide noise ban was. "Operation
Silent Night" was the mayor's
attempt to get the city that never
snoozes to pipe down. While a nice
idea, I still wonder if it's
possible to lower the volume in a
city that houses 8 million people
on 364 square miles.
Fortunately there
is always the great outdoors with
wide open spaces for those in
search of boundaryless pursuits
that do not infringe on the
personal rights of others. Unless
of course, you're in Calabasas,
Calif. This southern California
suburb recently implemented a
smoking ban in all outdoor public
areas (except designated spaces),
reportedly the first of its kind
in the United States.
According to the
bill, anybody could file a lawsuit
against anyone smoking within 20
feet of them. An outdoor smoking
ban may reduce secondhand smoke
exposure. But combining America's
propensity to litigate with the
growing trend to protect one's
personal space may unduly burden
our judicial system with
additional questionable lawsuits.
Where does this
all end - is anyone immune to the
intervention of government into
the lives of its private citizens?
Who's next, the
Easter Bunny? Well, only if you
live in St. Louis, Mo., as a
recent ban on the bunny has
commenced after a toy rabbit,
colored eggs, and a sign
exhibiting the words "Happy
Easter" were removed from the
lobby of city offices, fearing
non-Christians might find it
offensive.
I wonder if Thomas
Jefferson may have had the right
idea when he suggested, "That
government is best which governs
the least, because its people
discipline themselves."
True, unless of
course you're the Easter Bunny.
• Jill Rachel
Jacobs is a New York based writer
and humorist. |