A matter of concern is the global mindset. If specific communities are afraid to fly to specific countries the discomfort factor is on the increase. And the industry is at risk of ducking the issue even as it puts on its sunny side up face to the world … and itself.

When Erica Jong wrote the book by this title 30 years ago little did she realize that it would so aptly become synonymous with the state of the industry today. Because when you really hack it the bridge between the airline per se and the passenger is very rickety indeed.

What is more genuinely a matter of concern is that security measures have become so draconian not only has the pleasure of flying been affected but the real fear of being ‘suspect’ because you fit a certain profile is becoming a reality.

We have to ask ourselves: is aviation encouraging a new form of racism? Not only in the actual flight itself but even in obtaining visas and clearances and the sheer hassle of proving our bona fides. The sense of dismay begins at the time of filling in the form and continues until one is home again. The procedures have become demeaning and one does begin to wonder if security is not being used as a cover up for bad manners.

There is also acute embarrassment. At certain airports (and it isn’t just the US) people are pulled out of line purely because of their ethnic background. One gets the feeling it is almost automatic and in some way again creates a divide between the Caucasian race and the rest though even that is getting blurred. Up until this point the level of patience endures and one appreciates the need for caution as well as understanding that a certain percentage of innocents will be caught in the net. That is par for the course today.

It is the tomorrow which one worries about. With the dangers of narcotics having been put into competition with the threats of terrorists, the separation procedures at airports have taken on a more grotesque form.

On this canvas the sweeping powers given to ground staff (not security but even airline members on duty) and to on board crew produces a level of intimidation that is anti-passenger in its texture. We are faced with a situation where even legitimate grievances expressed by irate passengers can place those passengers under jeopardy and put them to task most unfairly.

Aviation legal experts are globally silent on the subject and there is now a nascent conspiracy that these are the eggs we have to break to make the omelette.

Frankly, it is all a little facile, explaining away autocratic cabin crew conduct(mis) in the interests of safety. Incidents of highhandedness to conceal or deflect from rank incompetence by using the safety factor are increasing. Flying is running the risk of becoming thoroughly unpleasant.

It is not a happy thought and if we all go along with it on the grounds that it is okay because, you know, the crew is right, then we are running the danger of increasing the fear quotient and creating cowered and submissive passengers paying good money to be bullied.

Rather than give cabin crew such awesome authority it would be a lot more logical to train them better and let them leave their personal prejudices on the ground.

If we don’t start placing some parameters on cabin crew authority it is swiftly becoming a one way street where a passenger is literally at the mercy of a whim on the part of those ironically entitled to serve him and ensure his comfort.

Regrettably, no one is doing anything about it. Not much anyway. And that is also because the western media is least affected and even sees it worth turning a blind eye. So what if some passenger from another part of the world is subdued or held by authorities on landing, who knows, he might have been one of those dicey ones.

As I said earlier, we are at a point where tolerance is creaking with the weight of what is blatant oppression. Give or take a few more acts of terrorism and the divide will become counter-productive.

For the whole industry.

I travel a lot and I have seen the eyes down, give up your rights and be unctuous behavior in passengers. There is uncertainty in their eyes, a glimmer of fear and a sense of foreboding.

They are far too eager to please check in staff, almost pathetic in their accommodation, a surrender that is so uncharitable in its manifestation. Indeed, there is also a growing acceptance (albeit with reluctance) toward the inevitable and certain races automatically allow their rights to be violated. They know in advance that they will be picked out and their luggage double checked in ref to their names, their countries of birth and even their color and the way they are dressed.

We can pretend it isn’t happening and we can even say that they have to pay for the sins of their brothers but no amount of advertising blather can conceal this second tier of fear that has permeated the industry.

It is abject and utterly disgraceful.

Again, I revert to the totalitarian attitudes in the cabin. It is a five to one wager that if a cabin crew member feels like having a go at a ‘suspect’ for anything he or she feels is not right (including the chewing of a nail or a nervous flutter of the fingers) that passenger can be offloaded.

The small print is getting worse.

It is time more circumspection and common sense was introduced into the passenger-crew equation.

Another facet that we overlook is that incompetence is increasing and service with a smile on several carriers who promise it isn’t there. Lost baggage, missed connections, airline ineptitude are all getting swept under the carpet in the name of security. The two are mutually exclusive to a great extent and must remain so.

That said, one agrees wholeheartedly that the fight must continue to make our skies safe. It just needn’t be at the expense of specific communities.

The general intrusion of terrorism into the equation has brought about a new thinking.

There have been several abortive scenarios ranging from gas pellets in the vents to sky marshals with plastic bullets to stun guns and hi decibel assaults on the ear but none have gone beyond the realm of ‘interest’ except, perhaps, the intrinsically dangerous concept of putting an armed man on a plane.

There have to be certain steps taken to cordon the flight deck and make it that much more difficult to access. However, closed doors on an aircraft or traps and other gimmickry is only a second line of defense. The hostile penetration occurs on ground and the aim has to be to sanitize the passenger uplift.

This can only be achieved by the use of information technology and the positioning of trained personnel at airports. The use of profiling and the sharing of information across territorial boundaries and political beliefs is paramount to air safety. Governments have to open up and there has also to be punitive action initiated against governments that harbor criminal elements or those who engage in acts of war against aviation whatever the cause.

Fly safer.