尿布、机长与被抹除的“人体”Nappies, Captains, and the Erasure of the Human Body
一个机长建议残障乘客在飞机上穿尿布。这听起来像是个极端的个案，但实际上它是一个极其精准的 structural violence 样本。在航空业的逻辑里，飞机不是一个承载人的空间，而是一个被极致优化的效率机器。当系统设计仅围绕“平均身体”展开时，任何偏离标准曲线的生物特征都被定义为“故障”或“成本”。
这就是典型的 Potential − Actual。残障人士拥有飞行的权利（Potential），但实际体验（Actual）却是被要求通过自我矮化、忍受生理折磨甚至穿着尿布来换取一张入场券。这种差额就是暴力。最令人作呕的是，这种暴力被包裹在“安全”和“规则”的文化外壳下——机长用“湍流不安全”来掩盖资源分配的缺失，航司用“尊重隐私”来逃避对权力滥用的解释。这是一种极其卑劣的 weaponization：将安全叙事武器化，用来合法化对特定群体的非人化处理。
这里存在一个巨大的共谋网络。从设计厕所的工程师到执行规则的机组人员，他们共同维护着一个男性中心且身体健全的元暴力叙事：只有符合某种“标准”的身体才值得被视为完整的人。而残障者在此时被客体化为一种“麻烦”，他们的主体性在要求他们穿尿布的那一刻就彻底死亡了。所谓的“道歉信”不过是 PR 版本的表演性让步，只要系统底层的设计逻辑不改变，这种 humiliation 就会在每一次起飞中循环。
A captain suggesting a disabled passenger wear a nappy on board sounds like an extreme anomaly, but it is actually a precise specimen of structural violence. In the logic of the aviation industry, a plane is not a space for humans, but a machine optimized for efficiency. When system design revolves exclusively around the "average body," any biological trait deviating from the standard curve is defined as a "glitch" or a "cost."
This is the classic Violence = Potential − Actual. Disabled people possess the right to fly (Potential), but the actual experience (Actual) is being forced to self-degrade, endure physiological torture, or wear nappies just to secure a ticket. This gap is violence. Most repulsive is how this violence is wrapped in the cultural shell of "safety" and "rules"—the captain uses "turbulence risks" to mask a lack of resource allocation, and airlines use "privacy」 to evade explaining the abuse of power. This is a vile weaponization: using safety narratives to legitimize the dehumanization of specific groups.
There is a massive network of complicity here. From the engineers designing toilets to the crew enforcing rules, they collectively maintain a masculine-centric, able-bodied meta-violence: only bodies that fit a certain "standard" are worthy of being seen as fully human. The disabled person is objectified as a "nuisance," and their subjectivity dies the moment they are told to wear a nappy. The so-called "apology letters" are merely performative concessions of PR. As long as the underlying design logic of the system remains unchanged, this humiliation will cycle with every takeoff.