The problem I see is the arbitrariness of giving FAs power. Put a dress code in writing, make it precise. Then make it count. I have no problem with that. It's their business. If I don't like it, I can take my money elsewhere. But don't put the passengers at the mercy of FAs after being put at the mercy of the TSA already.

And where do you draw the line? If that cleavage is not OK, how about really short skirts or tight dresses or women without bras? And then, is that more offending or less offending then a fat, stinky dude with hairy legs in bermudas and flip-flops? I know what I'd prefer.

Under these conditions one could even label crying infants a security risk. One can avert the eyes from an inappropriately dressed pax but one cannot but hear the child screaming. That causes stress, which may cause aggression. Or it could saw on people's nerves so badly, they wouldn't be concentrated enough in the event of an accident. And it might drown out security announcements. So aren't babies the bigger safety hazard?

And that t-shirt? So he's dark skinned with an exotic name and a mustache. He's even a student. Must be dangerous. The word appears very small on the t-shirt. One must really look at him quite closely to decipher that. Then how about a woman wearing a t-shirt that says "a sex bomb will kill us all"?

Here is a link to an article including photo of said t-shirt:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...TSA-shirt.html

Till