The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg proposes that men wear kilts on a day of protest against new gropey TSA policies. We suppose women could go pantyless, but somehow that seems less like a less effective fuck-you. Still, the dissent is building.
The administrator of the TSA was on Today defending the new protocol, which entails a more vigorous patdown for those who opt out of full body scanners. He insisted that children 12 and under not get such patdowns. (Memo to Hot Air: this horrifying video of a three-year-old girl getting patted down is from January 2009).
But that doesn't explain the patdown of an 8-year-old boy last week. His father told Reuters, "We spend my child's whole life telling him that only mom, dad and a doctor can touch you in your private area, and now we have to add TSA agent and that's just wrong. At some point the terrorists have won."
Despite the fact that the loudest voice on all this a guy who recorded himself telling a TSA agent that if he touched his "junk" he'd have him arrested (class implications, anyone?), the Today segment suggests that women are more upset about the system than men. But everyone should be irritated by the fact that the new protocols don't even appear to be effective. The full body scan, however invasive some find it, doesn't detect objects hidden in body cavities. And it's further indication that the security apparatus is purely reactive. Last holiday flying season, a guy put explosives in his underwear, and this year we get the "sliding motion" over genitals. We'd suggest betting they'll be taken by surprise again this year, but it's too depressing.