Perhaps they (TSA) should immediately mandate that the 'selector' and the 'viewer' have to be opposite gender.

I think SATTSO posted that before they were installed at his airport. People were led to believe it; it may have been the initial plan, but it changed.

See here from eyecue:

Didn't everyone hear? Attractive ladies are more likely to be terrorists according to new intelligence. Oh, wait. That's SSI.
Of course, Blogger Bob could just claim that there was a lady in the booth, therefore it is more efficient to select only females.

attractive women are also more likely to give birth to terrorists than men.

e.g. osama bin laden's mother was a woman

further screening of pregnant women will also be needed to determine who the father is...

this may, of course, result in missed flights.

something about this all makes me think of Salem, MA in the 1700s.

maybe we should water-board all travelers to see if they are witches?

:D:D:D:D ROTFL! That's the funniest thing I've seen in weeks. *wipes tears from eyes* Thanks, I really needed a laugh. :D:D

It's never been true. As ScatterX and rove312 said, the logistics just don't work, but TSA has allowed the assumption to continue. See my post yesterday over here.

What you see is not what you get. I have said this before there is no benefit to sending someone that is gorgeous to the ait. You cant see the features of the beauty in detail. There is no identity. There is nothing erotic or sensual about it. The gesture that you saw could have meant a lot of things but you said yourself that she had leggings on. That was one reason right there.

And why would LEGGINGS be a reason to need extra scrutiny? they are form-fitting, for Pete's sake. You can't hide anything there. Please explain. And dont give me that SSI crap.

Leggings? Really? Do you know what leggings are? Are you concerned with pantyhose as well?

@:-) Attractive young women with good legs wear leggings or pantyhose. Overweight middle-aged men (generally) don't. So they're not selected for being "attractive young women", they're selected for wearing leggings. See how much better that is? :rolleyes:

Leggings originally meant what is now leg warmers. I am showing my age. What it means now is effectively panty hose that are stylish. My bad

prove it...

Even leg warmers couldn't hide anything. For crying out loud, you pat down someone just because they wear leg warmers? That's a crime of bad taste, not possible terrorism.

Okay, i totally spat out my coffee laughing at this. I think that the Fashion Police would definitely detain people on sight for leg warmers. Well, that or cast them as extras in Flashdance. The TSA groping you: What a feeling!

If a human is doing the selecting, it's not random, but assuming they are not claiming it is I don't think having opposite genders helps the situation.

Any chance you could post a photo? No one would have to know your identity. You could post it from an internet cafe using Tor. Can't you see the absurdity of claiming that the photos are not revealing when their release is completely verboten?

I disagree that there is nothing erotic or sensual about the photos (that I have seen). I find the backscatter x-ray ones very erotic. They remind me of black and white nude art photos. Except they are even better because they are non-consensual. It's more exciting that way. And being the perverted male geek that I am I have even been researching the idea of trying to build a backpack or car-mounted backscatter x-ray machine. Every boys dream is a working pair of x-ray glasses and now it is technologically feasible to carry around a machine that actually does see under women's clothes. I think the technology is totally awesome. Also the claim that the viewer doesn't care about what the woman looks like is totally ridiculous. Just imagine yourself walking around with a pair of x-ray glasses. Which would you prefer looking at? A strikingly beautiful 16 year old girl, or an overweight 50 year old guy? To even ask the question is to answer it. You might not be able to distinguish which faces are pretty, but you can certainly distinguish male from female and nice bodies from ugly bodies. On your shift your friend puts the hottest chicks in the machine for you and on your shift you do the same for him. It's not really so hard to figure out. If I were working there you can bet I would be doing exactly the same thing.

Having said all that, there does seem to be a huge difference between the mmw images and the x-ray ones. Maybe you work at a checkpoint with mmw images. Hence your confusion. I still don't find the nudity in the mmw images to be acceptable. And they are still "dick measuring devices". But I will admit that the mmw images I saw were a bit too medical looking to be much of a turn on. I'd still love to have a portable model though to literally scope out the chicks. It's not as good as the the x-ray tech, but it would still be exciting.