Where you people (...sounding like Ross Perot for a second :) ) really screwed up is that you failed to understand that your TSA "textbook" definition of what constitutes a breast or genital doesn't mean a rat's eyelash to a person undergoing a pat-down, especially one for no good reason, such as "continuous screening" or a "random secondary."

You can split hairs all you want. But, if a person believes you touched them in an inappropriate manner, you touched them in an inappropriate manner -- period. You can't make this issue go away.

Problem is, most bathing suits nowadays show a good portion of a female's breasts..

Let's put it this way: if you touched me in this manner I would file a complaint against you.

Now, if you ran the palm of your hand across my upper chest parallel to the floor, that's a different matter.

Well put!

Person's body is private. All of it.

Consider this. Some people choose to cover their faces because of their religious beliefs or to conceal a disfigurement. It is their choice. It must be respected. So face is, in fact, a private area. Clearly, same argument can be applied to touching.

Personally, because of my background and experience, I am very intense about the issues of liberty and privacy. I take exception with any secondary screening unless there is some level of individualized reasonable suspicion. By reasonable suspicion I mean an WTMD alarm, a hard to resolve image on the X-ray, or some other objective, clearly articulated reason. "Hunch" does not count, wearing baggy clothes does not count, flying one way does not count, etc.

Here is another question to ponder. TSA says that pat-downs are necessary to keep bombs off the airplanes. However, they only subject a percentage of people to it. Credibility gap already. Take it one step further. Suppose that a person, selected for seconadary, actually is a terrorist with a bomb. Does anybody seriously think that this person will quietly walk over and submit to secondary screening? More than likely, this person will detonate the bomb right then and there. So, in ortder for this "security measure" to be effective the person suspected of carrying a bomb must by physically restrained. I don't think anybody will agree to that. Airports would be empty.

So, what do the pat-downs really accomplish? IMO, the answer is: "Nothing."

Bravo, PoliceStateSurvivor!

These days I usually fly wearing pajama-like surgical scrubs and thin-soled sandals. This has always gotten me through security quickly (except the one time I got SSSS'ed due to a one-way ticket). The only thing is I'm often asked if I'm a doctor, or if I just got off work. :)