I Wrote an Op-Ed and it’s Published Today

It’s for The Guardianand it’s here.

Posted in Uncategorized

TSA Discovers 81 Pounds of Marijuana in Passenger’s Luggage

A couple of my supervisors used to say, “If it’s just a nickel or a dime bag in someone’s luggage, pretend you don’t see it, because we’re not here to get people busted for miniscule amounts of weed.” 81 pounds turned out to be a different story, however.

Follow me on Twitter here.


Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

How I Went Through BDL’s TSA Line Presenting as Vaguely Genderfuck and Didn’t Get Arrested

 genderfuck 2


Guest blogger Batshua bat Yehonatan


Over the past few months, I’ve been thinking more about presenting as genderfuck in my non-work time; namely, I’ve been thinking about packing.

For anyone who doesn’t know me, let me make this clear. I am terrible at true genderfuck. Nobody is going to mistake me for a 14-year-old boy or an androgyne. I am, shall we say, rather well-endowed and I do not bind.

I’d been thinking for a while about what would happen if I got a patdown while packing, and whether or not it would flag me as a security risk or cause me to miss my flight. I don’t currently own a packer, so I’ve been packing with a wool sock which makes me feel rather … like I’m overcompensating, although my close friends swear it’s more subtle than I think.

As my combination Passover and Spring Break trip to visit my folks neared, I considered the possibility that I might want to pack on my travel day because darnit, it’s my right to present as whatever gender I want. However, as a person who always chooses to opt-out for patdown, I knew this could cause problems.

So I checked the TSA website. The transgender section only addresses binary identified people, and, of course, folks have had mixed results with their experiences traveling while trans*.

I used their feedback form and asked a number of specific questions about what would happen if a nonbinary identified person traveled presenting as their preferred gender. I got an autoresponse immediately, [“thank you for your submission”] and a “real” reply within 24 hours. I am sad to report that the “real” reply might as well have been generated by a robot. It was literally a copypaste of the TSA’s Transgender Travelers page. It wasn’t even signed.

My next stop was to call the TSA Cares hotline. I remembered immediately why people HATE calling this number. The first thing they do is ask for your full name. Now, granted, I’m hardly a threat to anything other than gender hegemony, and it gave me pause to give my name so forthrightly, because I suspect somewhere there’s a file on me under my legal name and a record of all the weirdass questions I’ve asked the TSA.

The woman who handled my call was very polite and friendly, but she had NO IDEA how to answer my question. She told me she’d worked this phone line for two years and had never been asked this question before. She asked her manager. Her manager didn’t know. However, this wonderful woman, instead of giving up, offered me a helpful alternative. She asked me which airports I was planning to fly out of and got me the contact information for the TSA head honchos at each airport.

I believe it was a Tuesday when I started the journey of reaching out to the Bradley Airport TSA guy, who is super nice and friendly and helpful. We played phone tag a bit due to his schedule, my schedule, and the crappy reception I have in the town where I serve.

Ultimately, I explained to him my situation: I am legally female, as masculine as I can dress, nobody would mistake me for anything other than a butch chick, but I prefer to pack as a way of expressing my gender. I chose to use the word “androgynous” rather than “genderfuck”, because I feel like “genderfuck” is an excessively provocative word to use with uninitiated cisgender folks who might be your allies. I let him know that I would, as I always have, prefer to opt-out and get a patdown and I realized that getting a patdown while packing might cause undue alarm and I wanted to know how best this could be handled so that nobody freaked out and I didn’t miss my flight.

He told me nobody had ever asked him about this situation before, and he provided a few options, including: having a female do the patdown, having a male do the patdown, or having my patdown split between a female officer and a male officer.  I said I was used to having a female do the patdown and was fine with that, but it was exciting to have options offered to me!

I was surprised to find out that even though my flight was on Friday, not even a whole week away, he had plenty of lead time to arrange things for me.  I was assigned a TSA Passenger Support Specialist and we set an appointment for a time for me to meet her at the security checkpoint. He also gave me the work cell number of the Transportation Security Manager for Bradley in case I showed up extra early or ran late. This was super helpful as I discovered this morning that I’d misplanned my schedule and needed to move everything up an hour. Then, of course, it rained the whole way down and I was somewhere between 5 and 10 minutes late.

After I checked in with my airline and dropped my bag off at X-Ray, I was met by my TSA Passenger Support Specialist, who took me right through to the head of the Pre✔︎ line. I joked that I should have gender issues more often.

The head of the Bradley TSA had warned me that since people perceived as women don’t generally have bulges in their pants, I would need to disclose my “anomaly” and it might warrant further screening. Because I was identifying as nonbinary, the transgender policy doesn’t currently cover me.

Before commencing the patdown, I had literally announced “There is an anomaly in my pants”.  I found out that technically my sock does count as a prosthetic, but since I’m not identifying as a trans man, again, they have to check my “anomaly”.

It was suggested that since I’d have to remove “the anomaly” to scan it for residue, I should have a private patdown. Basically, you’re not allowed to reach into your pants and pull stuff out in a public place because children are going through security, too.

So I went to get a private patdown with my TSA Passenger Support Specialist and another female TSA agent.  The procedure is the same as a regular opt-out patdown, but because there was an anomaly in my pants, I had to have a second patdown, known as a resolution patdown. They swabbed my TSA Passenger Support Specialist’s gloves for residue, and they had to x-ray my sock. Then the other officer did the resolution patdown where they patted vertically and horizontally over the front of my groin to ensure I wasn’t hiding anything else in there. They were totally respectful and non-creepy about the whole thing. I felt pretty fucking empowered.

After I was done, the Transportation Security Manager gave me an official TSA comment/complaint card as well as his business card. He reminded me that if I preferred, I could always check my packer and put it in after I pass through the security checkpoint. I agreed and pointed out that for some people, the wait in the security checkpoint line without packing would be extremely emotionally uncomfortable for them, and so I figured it was worth trying it out to see what it was like for all the people who might want to do this but are afraid to ask.

The man in charge of Bradley’s TSA department has put me in touch with the man who is in charge of the TSA’s diversity department so that we can talk about what kind of policy changes might benefit nonbinary travelers. I don’t know how much weight my words will have, but if anyone has suggestions/requests, I will forward those along.

One thing I am suggesting to him is a clearer combined policy on prosthetics. Officially, there are THREE pages that address prosthetics. One handles “prosthetics” — things like arms and legs. One handles “breast cancer survivors”, and one handles “transgender travelers”. If you read the prosthetics page, it says that your prosthetic may be handled and removed and checked by the TSA folks. If you read the breast cancer survivor page, it says if you’re wearing a prosthetic, they can’t ask to look at it or for you to remove it, but if it’s packed in your carry-on, they might need to look at it, but it’s excluded from the 3-1-1 rule. If you read the transgender traveler page, it reads very much like the breast cancer survivor page. I think it makes a lot more sense to have all three pages refer to ONE page that clearly addresses different kinds of prosthetics so that it doesn’t look like there’s conflicting information about what you may or may not be wearing.


Batshua is a genderqueer gray-asexual panromantic polyamorous person. They are a neuroatypical, chronically ill, invisibly-disabled Jewish pagan living in rural western Massachusetts. Ze recently started identifying as more strongly genderfuck than previously and has been experimenting with various forms of presentation. She doesn’t generally consider herself an activist, but he got the idea in his head to pack while flying home for Passover this spring. Batshua generally doesn’t care what kind of pronouns are used as long as they refer to sentient beings.

If anyone in the gender variant community, or anyone else, would like to get in touch with Batshua, email me at jason.e.harrington@gmail.com, and I will forward the information.

Related reading: The Most Awkward Moment for a TSA Screener.

Follow me on Twitter here.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

I Am Glad to Turn This Site Over to TSA Employees and Former TSA Employees for a While

Over the past year, I have received some interesting email from current and former TSA employees, expressing very real, legitimate, and non-“SSI”-divulging  concerns that the public has every right to know about, and which TSA screeners across the nation have every right to see being published. The thing is, most TSA employees are far too scared of retaliation from local management to express their concerns in the media, even though current federal employees do have First Amendment rights, as long as what they write or say falls under the category of public concern.

For the most part, the media is not interested in publishing non-sensational, relatively “banal” articles involving true, addressable organizational problems within the TSA (promotion system, cronyism/favoritism, the re-certification system etc). The media is only interested in eye-popping headlines. That is just reality, as I’ve found out. However, as a former TSA employee who is now in charge of an outlet that can provide substantial exposure, I am fully willing to give voice to TSA employees who wish to exercise their Constitutional, First Amendment rights as federal employees.

Even though I was once told that I “Can’t be doing things like writing letters to the New York Times” by a TSA manager (initials M.R., no longer employed) after a letter of mine was published in the New York Times (that manager’s advice to me definitely felt like a threat), I would like TSA employees around the nation to know that federal employees do have First Amendment rights, and are legally permitted to speak out, without being at risk of losing their jobs (per several federal court rulings), as long as their speech acts fall under the aegis of public concern.

Since the fourth branch of government is mostly uninterested and or unfamiliar with the day-to-day concerns of a Transportation Security Administration employee (since those concerns are usually deemed to not be “headline-worthy”), and since I, as a former TSA employee, am interested in those day-to-day concerns, and find them to be absolutely headline-worthy, I would like to make it known to TSA employees across the nation that this site, right here, Taking Sense Away, is a platform available to you from which you may exercise your First Amendment rights as federal employees, and have your opinions and concerns published for a substantial number of people to see, without having to overcome the unfairly high bar that most members of the sensational-headline-hungry media set as a requirement for access to publication.

The reason I am writing this is because I have recently talked to TSA employees with stories and legitimate complaints that are clearly in the realm of public concern, and who were, unfortunately (with a couple exceptions) unaware of the concept of public concern– in other words, they were under the impression that, as TSA employees, they had no First Amendment rights when it came to expressing their opinions in newspapers, or any public forums. Personally, as a TSA employee, I was never given any training modules making clear to me my First Amendment rights as a government employee when it came to expressing myself in the media. I was given training modules that informed me of my Whistleblowing Act powers, yes, assuming something was very wrong/corrupt in the TSA environment around me, and assuming that my immediate superiors weren’t addressing my concerns about what was wrong after I contacted them.

But as for my right to, say, read the New York Times, see a debate raging that was of national/public concern, and simply express my opinion on the issue so as to meaningfully add to the national/public debate, with the insight that comes with being a federal employee, I was told that “You can’t be doing that here at TSA.” And that was it.

I have approximately 6 great letters from 6 current and former TSA screeners that I am going to publish within the next 2 weeks. All of them express information that the public has every right to know, and which in no way divulge any sort of “SSI.”  If any other former or current TSA screeners have information regarding things they witnessed as TSA employees that fall under the category of public concern, I want you to know that this site is a place that you can turn to, and which will do its best to publish what you have to say.

The following is a direct quote from David Hudson, research attorney at the First Amendment Center (law degree from Vanderbilt University).”Disgruntled worker” is a tricky distinction in the following excerpt– but it seems like such a porous criterion that it may ultimately be all but irrelevant:

“Public employees can contribute greatly to civic debate. They are uniquely
situated to speak out on important issues of which the average citizen is unaware. When public employees speak as citizens rather than as disgruntled workers, courts must respect their free-speech interests.

Justice O’Connor recognized this point when she wrote that ‘government
employees are often in the best position to know what ails the agencies for which they work; public debate may gain much from their informed opinions.’

This same principle applies in retaliation and patronage cases. When a public employer retaliates against an employee simply because it dislikes the content of his or her speech, other employees are discouraged from making comments that could be interpreted as critical.” (Source)

Posted in Uncategorized

TSA All Surround Security Program

Over at the TSA News Blog, Lisa Simeone has details on the ASS program. It is an April Fool’s piece. I’m admitting that it’s an April Fool’s piece because it is now at least 9 P.M. wherever you are (for Americans), and you’ve probably already seen some April Fool’s Day activity going down, so by now your defenses are well-raised in regard to any April Foolery. There’s no point in even bothering to try to hit anyone with an April Fool’s Day surprise at this point in the day/night, the way that I see it. But it is an amusing piece from Lisa Simeone, here.

Posted in Uncategorized

1st Place Winner of the “Plots the TSA Imagines it Has Foiled” Contest: The Snow Globe Plot


Once again, the evil TSA prevented us from taking down planes filled with infidel stooges, which would have allowed us to overtake the USA and subjugate your morally corrupt population!

It took years of planning and research. We studied hormones, child behavior and reproduction. Our obedient women were bred to produce 60 men no taller than 4 feet. The correct hormone treatments eliminated whiskers and kept faces soft and feminine, like children. Our faithful martyrs endured hours of Shirley Temple movies and the Andy Griffith Show to perfect their behavior during TSA screening. Even worse, they endured hours of South Park and The Simpsons to succeed during phase two— distracting flight attendants. Careful clothing purchases at The Gap produced the intended sentimental and adorable child warriors. We were on our way to mission success.

On July 19th, 2012, 30 men were disguised as little girls, 30 as little boys and all spent the day at Disneyland in California with “Americanized” adults. Ha! It was brilliant. No one suspected these “families” knew one another or were anything other than stupid Americans wasting their money on silliness and fried food.

Adorned with Mickey Mouse ears, Tinkerbell wings and Cinderella crowns (extra virgins for those martyrs!) the families independently made their way to the John Wayne Airport in Santa Ana. Wearing synchronized Donald Duck watches, they planned to board 5 separate East bound planes, all leaving late that afternoon.

The brilliance of this plan was the souvenirs carefully packed in carry-on bags and little pink backpacks. Stupid T.S.A agents with their rah rah red white and blue—how could they possibly think a Mary Poppins snow globe could be dangerous?! How could the T.S. A. heathens know that the afternoon sun magnified by a dozen snow globes could burn a hole in the cockpit door?! How could those miscreants imagine the effectiveness of a Cinderella magic wand wielded as a poker up the nose of a pilot?! Who in Allah’s name let it slip that a Pirates of the Caribbean plastic sword could render a man useless if applied between the legs at just the right angle?!

We practiced for years. Blocking the aisles with seemingly undisciplined children. Training junk food loaded bodies to vomit on cue to occupy flight attendants at just the right moment. Burning anything imaginable using just a snow globe and the sun. Picking locks with Little Mermaid pins. And best of all, using Woody’s Nerf gun Blaster. You really can poke out an eye! It was a magnificent plan with a twist of irony using beloved cultural icons. Not only would we take down airplanes but we would take down Disney! The American economy would not be able to withstand the collapse. Taking over the Western world would be so easy even your “Goofy” could do it.

Alas. What we did not know is the T.S.A. agent in charge of snacks that morning forgot to stop at Dippity Donuts. Not wanting to incur the wrath of his fellow agents, he stopped in Terminal B for pastries at Let Them Eat Cake.  Even the lowest ranking soldiers in Al-Qaeda know better than to eat anything from Let Them Eat Cake!

How could we possibly know that every single T.S.A. Agent that day would be even crabbier and more miserable than usual from eating tasteless, stale pastries? How could we know that the cheese pockets would give agents the trots?  How could we know they would confiscate every single snow globe, every single pirate sword and every single Nerf gun blaster without a second glance at the well-rehearsed crestfallen faces of our brave terrorist comrades? Only a single agent said a snow globe could go through in a “Ziploc quart-sized plastic bag” but she was quickly brought into line by her supervisor who knew the great danger of allowing a snow globe into the cabin.

Unbelievably, our exceptional plan was destroyed in a matter of minutes. Years of work. Years of planning. The T.S.A. proved once again to be too smart always, for us. Or as we like to say, TSA-FU.


Fictional plot submitted by Rosemary.

Posted in Uncategorized

And Now for Something Completely Different: Hate Mail Part 3

We are, at the very least, on part 3 in terms of hate mail posts. I’ve actually probably received closer to 10 pieces of pure hate mail since starting this site, but the majority of those were short little “Fuck you traitor! Airport security is AMERICA and if you don’t like it git the fuck OUT MY ‘MERICA!!!!” It’s hard not to just completely forget those emails after giggling for a couple seconds.

This morning I received a piece of hate mail that pretty much just made me laugh, as well. I instantly just deleted it forever from my Gmail inbox and didn’t think much of it. I now greatly regret that.

The email was something along the lines of “Hey asshole….making jokes about the TSA doesn’t make you witty, or a good humor writer. It’s not hard to get humor out of TSA, anyone can do it. You are the worst thing I’ve ever seen on the internet. Bye.”

Or something along those lines. I started to write a response, beginning with “Hi there. Actually, I was publishing humor pieces, as well as non-humor pieces, for publications well before I ever wrote a single thing about the TSA…” but then I realized “Wait, why am I trying to be reasonable and civilized with some person who fires off emails to strangers along the lines of  ‘You fucking suck. That’s all I have to say. Bye.'” That was when I deleted the email forever.

But a little later, I realized that I shouldn’t have done that. I should have responded to him. I tried desperately to recover his email address, but it was too late. So now all I can hope is that my very special hate-mailer reads this. This is what I would write in response to you, if I hadn’t made the unfortunate decision to just delete you permanently:

Hi, Person Who Emailed Me This Morning to Call Me an Asshole and Tell me I’m the Worst Thing on the Entire Internet and Not at All Funny Because All I Do is Draw Humor from the TSA, Which is an Easy Target. I understand where you’re coming from with that. In fact, I already went over this with another reader/emailer right after I started my blog. He compared writing humorously about the TSA to poking a large, neurologically disabled bear with a stick. I told him that unfortunately, he was absolutely right.

First, Mr. Hate Mailer, I’d like to draw your attention to the fact that not all of my posts are even trying to be humorous. Many of them are quite serious. Second, as to your claim that “Drawing humor from the TSA does not prove any sort of humor-writing talent at all; therefore, you have none,” I’d like to point you to the fact that I was drawing humor from Henry David Thoreau’s Walden, failed Internet start-ups, Arthur Miller’s The Death of a Salesman, Raymond Chandler and laptop repair guys, and many other topics, well before I published a single piece of TSA-themed humor.  McSweeney’s Internet Tendency has a withering rejection rate; so withering, in fact, that there are many staff-writers for The Onion who have most certainly experienced cold rejection after submitting to McSweeney’s. (And actually, every other current McSweeney’s contributor is an Onion staff writer or headline contributor anyway, for that matter. You’ll even get the occasional– well, actually, frequent– head writer for the Daily Show with Jon Stewart being published on McSweeney’s.) But fine. Since you know humor and wittiness so well, Mr. Hate Mailer Man, I will make you a deal.

Email me back, please, Mr. Hate Mailer Man, just so we can reestablish a connection. From there, I would like to make a gentlemanly wager: Since you know humor and wittiness so well, I hereby publicly declare that, if you can get one humor piece published by McSweeney’s, or any equivalent publication, at any time within the next year, I will pay you $2,000 via Pay Pal, and post a picture on this site in which I am wearing a bunny costume holding a sign that says “[Insert your name here] was right: I am the worst thing on the internet. He owns me for life.”An example of a near-equivalent to McSweeney’s would be the New Yorker’s Shouts and Murmurs section. McSweeney’s is something like a 98-percent rejection rate. Shouts and Murmurs might be a 99-percent rejection rate, or so. They’re close. Numbers 2 and 1 as far as open-submission humor publications.

You ready to dance, Mr. Hate Mailer? You ready to take my $2,000 and make me show up on my own site in a bunny costume admitting absolute defeat, Oh arbiter of Internet humor and wit? You better be, Mr. Hate Mailer. Because now…

It’s on.


Posted in Uncategorized