Maybe what they're really worried about is how they'll react to being groped... (and may I just say that you guys drew the short straw--so to speak--with that whole "obvious signs of arousal" thing, can't even imagine what it would be like to have to try to hide one of those...)
The average passenger sees almost infinitely fewer patter-downers than the average patter-downer sees passengers. So his fear is misplaced. The average patter-downer fondles dozens or hundreds of gay men a day; your chances of getting stroked by a gay patter-downer are extremely low, no matter how many they hire.
A few years ago, I was patted down by a hot TSA agent at SeaTac Airport. I popped an involuntary boner that I couldn't hide while he was doing it. It was a funny, but a little bit embarrassing.
The clear answer here is to promote the heterosexual agenda - fight fire with fire - by ensuring that all pat-downs are conducted by opposite-sex TSA agents.
Or even worse, what if a hot lesbian TSA agent were giving a hot, bi-curious female passenger a pat-down when suddenly, OOPS! Their clothes fall off and they accidentally start making out and groping each other?
Delgaudio's Public Advocate organization says it supports ending same-sex marriage and pro-life initiatives, along with "equality under the law, regardless of one's sexual orientation."
This organization needs to spend some money on a proofreader. Sounds to me like they support ending the following: same-sex marriage, pro-life initiatives and "equality under the law".
I don't agree with the TSA's security measures, but I abhor this idea of, "watch out, the gay guy is going to grope you!"
Do these GOP leaders really believe that self control is so weak that TSA workers will be getting their jollies? I'll grant you that there might be someone out there that might get off on enjoying checking under the fat folds of a large sweaty man or woman, but it's an encounter that only last a few minutes at most, hardly enough to be very enjoyable. (Of course if he was fairly rapid fire it would explain a lot.)
The real question is...How long till Eugene Delgaudio is caught having his luggage lifted? By someone who will admit that they were acting out TSA pat down scenarios in their encounters?
What IS it with homophobes assuming they're so fucking irresistible? Guys, the hot gay TSA agents are not lining up for a chance to fondle your saggy, sweaty nut-sack. They're way more interested in the good-looking, well-groomed young twink in the line behind you.
People have long assumed I'm liberal because I'm a Democrat.
It doesn't matter that when I vote for a Democrat, more often than not it's as conservative as I can get; I'm the sort of liberal who sees few candidates that actually suit my needs. Living in the Northwest, though, I suppose I'm fortunate. The midwest or south would probably drive me nuts.
But the logic always goes that one believes what they do because the Party says so; with liberals and leftists, it can't possibly be that we back the Party because it is the best shot we have in the electoral system.
We are, apparently, mindless monkeys. However ... in discussing various social issues with friends and associates over the years, one point I have reiterated runs all the way back to childhood. Remember how teachers would tell you to behave yourself on the field trip, because you are representing the school? Or how your parents would ask, "What must the neighbors think of us?"
So I remind people, when the occasion demands, that one of the reasons I'm not a Christian, or Republican, or (fill in the blank) is that I don't wish to be like them. That is, when we see the televangelists, or hear the censors screaming, or suffer through the idiotic screeds about God and creation, or what's wrong with homosexuals, this is not how I wish to be viewed. Why would I forsake what paltry intelligence I have in order to fit in with, or be part of, that crowd?
Why would I want to be like Bob Tilton, or Lon Mabon, or Christine O'Donnell ... or, in this case, Eugene Delgaudio?
This is why conservatives are laughingstocks on the best of days. Otherwise, they're just contemptible attention-whores. Delgaudio has managed to take two disparate issues—e.g., terrorism and gay rights—that have serious implications for our society, and turn them into laughingstocks. To the one, I should thank him for the mirth. To the other, though, nobody should wonder why I so rarely vote for Republicans.
and what the fuck am I supposed to do as a bi guy? even trans TSA workers couldn't pat me down, since i've been known to appreciate a hot trans gurl in my time...
I'm a bi girl and to be honest I've thought about doing my bit to protest these measures by purposefully telling my probably straight female groper that I'm bisexual. However, I don't want to perpetuate homophobia. I just want to make sure that TSA agents are as uncomfortable with this policy as we are and hope they'll say something to their bosses about it.
I don't want to know what kind of Freudian slip that is.
Did you know that John Adams had to fight with Jefferson to get the Gay Bill of Special Rights added to the Articles of Confederation?
Yes, but there it is -- hanging at the Martin Van Buren memorial.
@9: I bet that's been done. Rule 34 of the Internet, bro.
This organization needs to spend some money on a proofreader. Sounds to me like they support ending the following: same-sex marriage, pro-life initiatives and "equality under the law".
And this whole thing... how old are these people, anyway? My nephews (5 & 8) are more mature than this!
Have you ever flown in the South?
Do these GOP leaders really believe that self control is so weak that TSA workers will be getting their jollies? I'll grant you that there might be someone out there that might get off on enjoying checking under the fat folds of a large sweaty man or woman, but it's an encounter that only last a few minutes at most, hardly enough to be very enjoyable. (Of course if he was fairly rapid fire it would explain a lot.)
It doesn't matter that when I vote for a Democrat, more often than not it's as conservative as I can get; I'm the sort of liberal who sees few candidates that actually suit my needs. Living in the Northwest, though, I suppose I'm fortunate. The midwest or south would probably drive me nuts.
But the logic always goes that one believes what they do because the Party says so; with liberals and leftists, it can't possibly be that we back the Party because it is the best shot we have in the electoral system.
We are, apparently, mindless monkeys. However ... in discussing various social issues with friends and associates over the years, one point I have reiterated runs all the way back to childhood. Remember how teachers would tell you to behave yourself on the field trip, because you are representing the school? Or how your parents would ask, "What must the neighbors think of us?"
So I remind people, when the occasion demands, that one of the reasons I'm not a Christian, or Republican, or (fill in the blank) is that I don't wish to be like them. That is, when we see the televangelists, or hear the censors screaming, or suffer through the idiotic screeds about God and creation, or what's wrong with homosexuals, this is not how I wish to be viewed. Why would I forsake what paltry intelligence I have in order to fit in with, or be part of, that crowd?
Why would I want to be like Bob Tilton, or Lon Mabon, or Christine O'Donnell ... or, in this case, Eugene Delgaudio?
This is why conservatives are laughingstocks on the best of days. Otherwise, they're just contemptible attention-whores. Delgaudio has managed to take two disparate issues—e.g., terrorism and gay rights—that have serious implications for our society, and turn them into laughingstocks. To the one, I should thank him for the mirth. To the other, though, nobody should wonder why I so rarely vote for Republicans.
Gee, thanks, Dan...