Guess #1: Underwire bras?

Having said that, GradGirl, I see both sides of the argument with you (and I've seen you've taken some heat here). I don't know the history of the issue you had, but obviously it was serious to you. Whether its serious to anyone else or not is irrelvant.

I respect you in this sense though. You complain here about TSA, but you've change your life so you don't have to deal with it. So many others here complain, complain, complain and then head off to the airport to "bend over and take it again".

My entire issue with many of the posters here is that my contention is that searches of your bags and body at airports is VOLUNTARY!!!!. If you don't like it, you are always free to NOT FLY!!!!. Unlike most here, you have actually recognized and enacted that in your life. Perhaps some of the other chronic complainers and anti-TSA types should follow your lead.

Until they show up at the Greyhound stations... and the Amtrak stations... and ...

I'm confident they won't be showing up at Turnpike toll booths, but it's a mighty long walk to San Francisco.

That's why we complain and complain and complain and then bend over and take it, not just bend over and take it as some of us do.

.... now what? Are you willing to let all people fly naked? That would solve a fair amount of the WTMD "beeping" -- unless haraSSSSment or a variation thereof was desired by a rapscallion.

Perhaps some of the chronic defenders of insecurity measures should stop flying, hide in a cave, and let the rest of us get on our merry way with flying and living as usual. And the more miles we fly, the more votes we should get in determining the "security" level.

In all reality, I don't think you'll ever see TSA or similar screening at bus stations, train depots and subways. Congress and the American people wouldn't stand for the expense involved. Chertoff has already said that these transportation venues are pretty much on their own, and he won't commit DHS (read TSA) to providing security.

I think the reason for the focus on aviation as opposed to any other means of transportation is because the idea of flying bombs has a much more devastating impact than a blown up bus, train or subway. Hate to reduce this down to a matter of acceptable and unacceptable casualties, but that's essentially what it all boils down to.

If air travel shuts down (whether officially, or just because peopel stop doing it because it is perceived as "too dangerous"), the country shuts down.

The same can't be said of bus or train travel. Train travel is probably moderately important in the Northeast, but it could be easily replaced by driving. Bus travel could end and the country (economically) wouldn't notice.

I doubt that that makes breasts "fair game" for screeners; I believe GradGirl's statement is more along the lines of "why is it permissible to pat down breasts that alarm the wands but not male genital areas if they also alarm?" and is an issue more of gender and culture than that there is some reason that women set off the WTMD and wands due to bras.

Your guess would explain why women may alarm more often than men and get sent to secondary, but not why it is acceptible to pat them down in otherwise socially-unacceptable areas whereas it is not okay for the same to be done to men who alarm. (that said, I am sure the TSA will make sure to resolve a man who alarms the wand down under, but pat-downs are not going to be the primary method of doing so I would think)

Are you suggesting that all I need to do to get a gun on board an airplane is to stuff a gun in my pants in the genital area? Are you suggesting that when this sets off the WTMD and I get wanded; and the wand beeps while in my genital area... are you suggesting that in such a case, my genital area will not be further examined?

If its that easy, then there are passengers with guns on every flight.

It is very interesting that we have become a society so driven by air transportation, to the point that a breakdown in the air transportation sector might be very akin to what happens with the train breakdowns in Atlas Shrugged.

Even more oddly, people perceive air travel as "universal," such that an act of terrorism in the skies is seen as a threat to them wherever they travel via air, whereas I believe an act of terrorism on Amtrak or the like would not send people scrambling away from the train system; such an attack would be perceived as "somewhere else" and not affecting people directly.

You ignored my second paragraph:

(emphasis mine)

The TSA will still resolve an alarm involving men and their nether regions, but I seriously doubt it will be by a frontal pat-down. Probably a suggestion of, "Sir, could you please step aside into this room? Is there anything you may be carrying that would alarm our wands?"

It's starting to look like that you have become a TSA apologist in a big way.

We are told not to profile SOOO much that I for one feel like if you are male,white, 20-50 years old, you are going to be "continuoused."

I had read the second paragraph, just not thoroughly and misinterpreted what you were saying. With that.....

Grabbing ones testicles/breasts in public view is not acceptable, but asking someone to go to a private rooms and remove their pants/shirt is acceptable? Given the choice, I'd say go ahead a feel me up in public view rather than dropping trou in private. If you prefer to have your shirt removed in private, I'm sure TSA would be happy to accomodate.

Regardless, I find it to be somewhat of a conflict that "touching through clothes" so offends you, but actual removal of those clothes (albeit in private) seems to be less offensive.

Not apologizing for TSA at all. Just trying to figure out what they have to apologize for.

No, both offend me, but the public aspect can amount to humiliation for many people. At least in private it can be done with some degree of dignity, and they do have to resolve those alarms somehow.

If you knew the same-sex person to be potentially sexually interested in you, would you still prefer to be "touched up" .... slowly ..... gently ..... fondly?