They're looking at your naked body!

[Joanne98]

Posted by Soulskill on Saturday June 07, @12:00AM
from the too-cheap-to-hire-superman dept.

Lapzilla brings word that airports around the US are beginning to use a new type of body-scanning machine which records pictures of travelers underneath their clothing. The process takes roughly 30 seconds, and the person viewing the pictures is located in a separate room. We've discussed similar scanners in the past. From USAToday:
" said passengers would be alarmed if they saw the image of their body. 'It all seems very clinical and non-threatening -- you go through this portal and don't have any idea what's at the other end,' he said. Passengers scanned in Baltimore said they did not know what the scanner did and were not told why they were directed into the booth. Magazine-sized signs are posted around the checkpoint explaining the scanners, but passengers said they did not notice them."

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/06/07/0042248

How long before the pics show up online?

[dysfunctional press]

1. people in this country are WAY too self-conscious about their naked bodies.

we're all humans, and we all have the same stuff as everyone else, in one or the other of two basic models.

i think a lot of it comes from the inclinations of the over-religious toward ingraining shame into children's heads.

[alarimer]

13. This is an invasion of privacy

and has nothing to do with how Americans feel about their bodies. Being ogled naked without permission is the worst invasion of personal space and privacy that I can think of.

[Greyhound]

24. You're both right. n/t

[dysfunctional press]

46. that's EXACTLY the mindset i'm referring to-

"Being ogled naked without permission is the worst invasion of personal space and privacy that I can think of."

nice misuse of the word "ogle" btw- security people who look at images of people all day are generally not doing it to "ogle".

and i can think of MUCH worse invasions of personal space and privacy than being seen naked- many of them involve actual physical contact and intense pain. i'd certainly also rather be seen naked than to have someone going through all my personal financial and/or medical records with a fine-tooth comb.

[Sivafae]

61. I agree and disagree at the same time. When I dance in a strip joint, that is my choice.

I have control over that situation. I put myself up for that. However, I don't have control over what is happening to my image once it is taken at an airport. I just want to take a damn plane from point a to point b. No big mystery there. And if human history has proven anything, give people power and they will undoubtedly abuse it.

[Xenotime]

63. Exactly. It won't be long before these images appear on the net.

[dysfunctional press]

65. how so...?

if the scanners/monitors are stand-alone devices not networked with the internet, and with no way for the operator to copy/download images- how do the images make it to the net...?

AND- even if it were to happen- so what? the tsr isn't going to know the name of the person whose image they're looking at, so an image that made it to the net would be anonymous as to who it was a picture of.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

82. But ARE they standalone devices?

Are they networked? To a central security office? I can't quite believe they're not networked.

Me, I don't care. I don't think my overweight old mortal coil will make it to the internet.

I just hope that whatever they're doing, they do it fast, so I don't spend too much time in the security line. It's one of the reasons I'd rather drive if possible.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

91. Not hard

all it stakes is one unprofessional TSA employee, not exactly an oxymoron, to snap pictures of the image on their phone...

[bushmeister0]

134. There's no law preventing that from happening.

"Technewsworld reported recently:

" . . . TSA is quick to point to the safeguards it has in place to ensure that the technology is not abused. Privacy advocates at Electronic Privacy Information Center are unimpressed with TSA's promises, however, and are calling for a law forbidding the storage or transmittal of these images. 'We are not against the scanning technology per se,' Marc Rotenberg, EPIC's executive director, told TechNewsWorld. 'However, a law needs to codify the rights of passengers with this technology.' EPIC has raised this point with the Homeland Security committees in both the House and the Senate, Rotenberg said. 'Such a measure could be tacked onto the next appropriate bill.' Without a legal backstop, he added, 'this will become a giant system to collect and store naked pictures of American travelers.'"

http://www.technewsworld.com/rsstory/59786.html

I'm sure that'll be happening real soon, see you on the internet!

[dysfunctional press]

72. how would the person viewing the image even know the name of the person they are seeing?

even if an image were somehow to escape- it wouldn't be recognizable as any specific person.

[King Coal]

109. When I dance in a strip club, they all leave.

:rofl:

[JPettus]

153. At least they leave

When I dance in a strip club, they throw stuff at me!

[readmoreoften]

78. How the hell do know what the security people are thinking?

You can't say that someone with a paraphilia isn't behind that camera jacking off on his 15 minute breaks. What an assumption. He's a security guard!!! He get's pay $10 an hour! He can't possibly be getting off!!!

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

92. Nice view of folks making 10$ an hour... /sarc

If we paid them 50$ an hour would they be less likely?

[readmoreoften]

146. Let me clarify. Dig at the contracting system not the employees...

Hell--my partner doesn't even make $10 an hour.

Making $10 an hour was a round about way of saying "not a real government job with benefits and security" but rather "crappy corporate job by a contractor that doesn't even care enough to pay their employees a living wage." If the contractor doesn't want to "spend money" on their employees, they probably won't to "spend money" on public safety either. What do they care? Not like the taxpayers can complain.

I was thinking about how after 9-11 they put in TSA folks making $6 an hour at some airports and the discussion that ensued from that convo.

It was also a dig at the total irrationality of the post. What is it exactly about a TSA officer that makes him or her so much more trustworthy than any shlub you pull in off the street? That he makes $10 an hour? Or $50? That he's wearing a badge.

Sorry I was posting quickly and while half sleeping.

[dysfunctional press]

98. you seem to have no problem deciding how they think and act...

maybe we're both just projecting our own mindset onto the employees...? :shrug:

btw- can i get you a tissue for that?

[readmoreoften]

147. No I'm not projecting anything onto them. That's the point. I don't know them and neither do you.

Given that there are predators and perverts in the general population, and the rate of psychopath is supposedly at anywhere from 1.7% to 5% according the APA, that means that at best 1.7 out of every 100 TSA screeners is a psychopath and at worst 1 out of 20.

Unless you can provide evidence that TSA screeners are far more mentally stable than the average person, then you're playing "let's have an opinion."

No thanks, I don't need a tissue. Do you need some bengay for all that obnoxious shrugging you do?

[dysfunctional press]

148. those sme numbers must apply to all fields then, from gynecologist to paramedic to mailman to...

do you have the same heebie-jeebies about them...? :shrug:

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

90. People will not be oogling this

Im probably more prudish than most on this forum but a 10 yo with a pen and paper can make more explicit images of people..

[backscatter712]

103. Don't be so sure. They leave little to the imagination...

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

105. Like I aid a 10yo with a pen can do better in terms of

lewd material

[backscatter712]

112. It's still humiliating.

It's demeaning and degrading, even if it's done with electronics instead of being physically forced to take your clothes off.

I don't care if it makes me "safer".

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

113. Well others might not feel that way....

Seriously its no less humiliating than a regular old metal detector and both are based on the same principle we don't trust you so go thorough this scan. If thats the principle thats offensive then well at least you are consistent..

If, however, these images are whats really bother you... And I apologize there really is no gentle way to say this, grow up... These are less suggestive then the covers on dozens of magazines you will walk by on the way to the plane and unless you are some famous bimbo like paris hilton nobody is going to care about these body scans..

[backscatter712]

117. Fuck you.

Grow up? GROW UP?!

Well excuuuuuse me for not wanting some minimum wage TSA monkey masturbating in a booth while watching pictures of my pointy bits through my clothes.

You are the classic example of the freeper "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" attitude. Fuck that attitude - I'm well within my rights to hide my orifices and genitalia.

So take your authoritarian attitude and shove it up your ass. If I decide to refuse a strip search, I shouldn't have to go through one. The TSA should be tarred and feathered for even thinking of this.

[JackRiddler]

118. You would better serve your case...

by cutting out the "minimum wage" modifier.

Or are you saying that a well-paid, better class of person masturbating to images of you would be just wonderful?

At any rate, you should accept a certain reality: odds are the thought of your pointy bits has caused quite a bit of masturbating in the world, regardless of whether these machines will ever be used. I doubt there will be more masturbating going on in the world as a result of this device.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

122. She clearly meant

that minimum wage folks are more likely to masturbate, not more desirable to...

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

121. Yes, Grow up..

giggle giggle boobie outlines..

"Well excuuuuuse me for not wanting some minimum wage TSA monkey masturbating in a booth while watching pictures of my pointy bits through my clothes."

And you think folks would be (1) masturbating to this (2) at work because they are 'minimum wage monkeys' nice view of the working poor you have you should grow up for that as well..

"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear"

Umm for someone deriding minimum wage workers as monkeys you really dont want to bring our respective attitudes into this... In principle this is no different than a metal detector and trust me nobody is going to risk their job (even if it is a minimum wage monkey one' to masturbate to this:



This is not about nothing to hide, nothing to fear *any more than metal detectors are* nor did I even *imply* that. I said up front I could respect your view on this if its also the view you held of metal detectors, other wise get over it! because this:

NOT PORN

NOT PORN
This is NOT PORN

"If I decide to refuse a strip search, I shouldn't have to go through one."

I agree one hundred percent, however you have no inalienable right to be on a plane so you can get in your car and drive..

[JackRiddler]

126. Not to mention the monkey part...

TSA worker = subhuman.

And like, I'm not supposed to hear the racism?

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

128. That part suprised me

but I guess when you get under someones skin its pretty ugly what can be found.. Even *if* there is no racism there is most certainly classism...

A friend of mine, smartest guy I have ever known, dropped out of college to find himself and was working security at a sports arena... someone like backscatter would see this person and think low life, lazy, unimpressive, dumb, person... After a few years away he went back and got the highest LSAT scores (after posing nothing but 4.0's) in the state...

The really sad thing is even *if* he decided to never go back he (nor any minimum wage worker) is below anyone else. Thats the culmination of the freeper thought I was accused of...

Ive know creeps who make 6 figures and some of the most honest caring people who barely made 5...

[JackRiddler]

129. I can think of mercenary drug dealers to children who make seven figures...

As covered in the Times today.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3411626

Harvard professors who are criminals and sociopaths committing crimes against millions of children - and they're going to find the Times excusing them, no criminal trial to fear, in the end probably even no sanction at Harvard.

And who's to say they're not masturbating like monkees to scattershot's pointy parts every 10 minutes?

[backscatter712]

130. I didn't mean anything by the minimum wage monkey comment.

I apologize for making it. I didn't intend anything racist by it.

Still, my point, as I illustrated by the picture I posted stands. The backscatter x-ray electronic strip search is far more intrusive than a metal detector or even a frisking.

A free society should never tolerate such invasions of privacy. Not to board an airplane, not without a warrant.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

131. Yea, Im sure you did'nt...

People get angry they lash out and usually what they say is how they really feel, just unedited.. Ill give you a pass on the racism (thats not the way I read your comment) but I do think you have a problem with minimum wage workers....

"A free society should never tolerate such invasions of privacy. Not to board an airplane, not without a warrant."

Why should a free society have to endure x-rays before getting on? This is about the fact you think the images 'leave nothing to the imagination when in fact I cant tell anything about the person other than if they have boobies... This, to you, is not about the liberty to travel without being searched its about your body and if thats the case an honest and forthright examination of whats being presented is necessary.

The image looks like an overexposed picture of a Barbie doll, no genitalia definition no definition of the breast other than the outline, no facial features, it really shows *nothing*..

[pitohui]

17. my naked body is not for sale for your pleasure, way to miss the point

these scanners make digital images, plenty of people are going to wake up one day and find their own body -- or their grandmother's -- on the internet being made mockery of

that isn't okay with me, if it's okay with you i don't want you to have any input into public policy

without privacy, there is no freedom

religion or no religion, if you want to whack off to my maked body and trade images of my naked body with other people and post it on the internet, YOU GET A SIGNED WRITTEN RELEASE FROM ME AND YOU PAY ME A LOT OF MONEY IN ADVANCE

my body does not belong to you and it does not belong to an airport employee either

some people have to learn the hard way i guess

what happens when it's your mom's photo? what happens when it's your daughter's?

[dysfunctional press]

44. it's a security scan, not a peep show.

people need to lighten up about their bodies.

on the other hand- a large share of the american population SHOULD be ashamed- not so much of their bodies, but of themselves for the way they treat their bodies, and what they let them become- through lousy diet and lack of exercise.

[slampoet]

52. So the reaction if someone breaks into your car is that the car owner should take better care of it?

Grow up a be a real American and stop trying to turn this privacy issue into a shame issue.

[dysfunctional press]

69. um...no.

learn a little comprehension, why don't you...?

[nickinSTL]

20. This is a serious invasion of privacy

I'm way in agreement that Americans are too self-conscious about nudity.

However, to create images of a person's naked body WITHOUT CONSENT is WRONG. It is an invasion of privacy.

I have no problem with nudity. I think this nation borders on psychotic in its tendency to freak out over nudity (the Janet Jackson episode being a prime example). However, I have a HUGE problem with my naked body being viewed without my consent.

[dysfunctional press]

45. it's an effective security tool. i welcome it's use.

but then again, we've only flown on one trip since 9/11 started all this crap, and don't see any trips for us on the horizon...the distant horizon even.

[spoony]

48. Effective at making flying ever less palatable

The entire process has been made as inconvenient and arbitrary as possible. I don't know why you consider this so "effective" as it would not have prevented 9/11, and comes from the same idiots who have used that tragedy to wage war and shred the Constitution while padding their wallets with fat juicy government contracts for unrelated and costly nonsense like this.

[dysfunctional press]

67. you're entitled to your opinion.

it may not have prevented 9/11- but it could certainly help prevent another.

[crikkett]

123. IMO it won't.

[beac]

132. I tend to agree with you, but only because I don't think they will use planes

the next time.

You can still board a train anywhere in this country with neither your baggage nor yourself being subjected to any kind of screening. Thousands of uninspected containers come into and are shipped around the country every day. Why would they bother trying to get through the still-spotty-but-better-since-9/11 airport security when they could take a train to within feet of the US Capitol or ship eight containers of poison with full confidence that 7, if not all 8, would make it to their intended target without ever being questioned?

And if they were determined to use a plane, they could just put something in an uninspected box being shipped as freight on the same flight that a human would have to be inspected to fly on.

The false sense of security that making people take off their shoes or walk through a scanner that makes them look like Casper the Friendly Ghost, is all about trying to pull the US airline industry out of a hole. With the added bonus of being able to claim they are keeping us "safe from terra."

[crikkett]

137. Some changes are underway

Uniformed officers are searching 'random' bags on NY subway, Amtrak and Caltrain, if not other lines as well.

[beac]

142. And I am NO WAY advocating for a society where we are

constantly being searched-- just pointing out that there are plenty of ways for them to cause mayhem without ever encountering a scanner (or potentially "pervy" TSA agent ;) .)

Ultimately, we will be safer when we no longer have war-mongering a-holes running our country. If we hadn't been stirring up trouble in the Middle East so that they could make a grab for Iraq's oil, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.





(edited for typo)

[havocmom]

51. Putting everyone in prison as a precaution that SOME may commit crimes would be effective security

but I don't think it is a welcome intrusion on most people's lives that we should tolerate.

9/11 is looking more and more like a means to an end, with the end being people acting like children wanting some benevolent parent figure to do what ever looks like security to the child.

The 'other' that is the power that gains more power through such intrusive Intel and violation of culturally accepted boundaries and FUCKING laws is NOT a benevolent parent figure. It is unknown, unaccountable entities and individuals who should not be given trust they have definitely not earned from citizens in a supposedly free nation.

It is time we stop making/accepting ANY excuses for the abuse of power these entities and individuals off for their abuses of the public trust and public office.

They have already shown they will round up and incarcerate innocent people without regard to our Constitution and international laws. What the hell does it take to see that they are NOT working for America?

[dysfunctional press]

68. not every person in the general public boards airplanes, so your analogy is flawed.

nt

[havocmom]

75. Guess you missed the metaphor

Prison = US under too much survailence and loss of privacy/rights/freedom

Your perception is damned short sighted.

[dysfunctional press]

96. it's all in how you percieve your world, i guess...

if you want to live your life seeing it as a prison, then i guess that makes you a prisoner- mostly of your own making.

me...? i'm a free man, and i try to get as much as enjoyment out of my life as i can.

peace.

[slampoet]

53. "I for one welcome our new overlords"

[dysfunctional press]

70. that's your choice, then...

[readmoreoften]

79. Guess you missed the sarcasm too.

[dysfunctional press]

97. or ignored it.

:shrug:

[hootinholler]

60. They do consent.

It's implied, not explicit. A condition of flying.

Why doesn't El Al need these scanners?

For those of you who think they won't be ogled, have you actually met TSA workers?

-Hoot

[nickinSTL]

77. I don't think most people are likely to be aware of this

which means there is no implied consent.

Consent can only be given (or even implied), IMO, if the person involved KNOWS that this is a possibility.

And I DO NOT consent. To having my body scanned in this way OR in having my right to travel limited by that refusal.

[hootinholler]

86. There's the rub...

You have no right to travel on an airplane you don't own.

-Hoot

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

93. ummm dont you give consent by going through the machine?

[Zuiderelle]

106. And the alternative? "Oh, you don't consent? So sorry, please go ahead and board the plane."

As if that will happen.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

108. No the alternative is not to fly

or to submit to an old school security check..

[Zuiderelle]

110. It's amazing that you don't find this to be an invasion of privacy.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

114. This no more invades my privact than the metal detectors I am forced to walk through..

And like I said, Im more prudish that most on this site..

[Zuiderelle]

115. Well, actually it does. But I guess we'll just disagree on this.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

116. how so?

I mean this image is not explicit its not a silhouette which is pretty undefined the principle (in terms of civil liberties and privacy) is no different than a metal detector...

[pnwmom]

66. People in this country are entitled to privacy with regard to their bodies. n/t

[dysfunctional press]

71. and people who board planes voluntarily give up that privacy as a condition to fly.

people in ALL countries are entitled to a safe and secure flight.

[SirDaddybear]

88. Nawwwwwwwwwwwww

I am just not as purdy as I used to be... hahha once I would have stripped and walked through the terminal with pride hahahahaah

Now? Not so much.

[dipsydoodle]

2. Now's the time to start writing messages

on your body with a soft pencil like "I don't need to use an x-ray machine to figure you've only got a little dick you pervert"

[Joanne98]

6. That's a great idea.

[Speck Tater]

10. Useless idea. Pencil marks are not visible. NT

[dipsydoodle]

32. They can't be using x-ray then

thick lead lines would show on an x-ray.

[anigbrowl]

36. Pencil lead is actually carbon. Lead in pencils was 200 years ago.

Please, open a science book. If you do want to leave witty messages, cut them out of tinfoil or mylar and use spirit glue to stick them to your chest/body.

[dipsydoodle]

38. Thank for the tip

:rofl:

[crikkett]

151. Yes and that will get you tossed into a small room for a *real* strip search

so fast it'll make your head spin.

[Speck Tater]

41. More like ultrasound. Sound waves pass through cloth, bounce off skin. NT

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

85. How about letters cut from aluminum foil?

On the other hand, pasting "F.U.C.K...T.S.A" on your torso will probably get you a trip to the "special security check room". Bend over and spread 'em, please.

[crikkett]

152. This violates Rule #1 of airport travel : you are not funny.

No matter how funny you may think you are, you're just not.

[ColbertWatcher]

3. Woo hoo!

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. Not that I'm expecting to do any flying (have a serious sinus condition

which makes my head feel like its going to explode with pressure changes) but if I were, the scanners who look at my naked body would just have to suffer the consequences.

[silverweb]

5. They already have.

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=airport+body+scanner&gbv=2

Do you think anybody's really that bored as to find these titillating?

[Joanne98]

7. Americans will do anything their told. No pride at all!

[silverweb]

18. That's true for some and false for others.

I was addressing only your question about how soon scans might end up on the internet, which I really don't think is a serious concern.

[nashville_brook]

12. for people who get off on this, it's not the image itself, but the submission/coersion.

[silverweb]

22. There's no evidence of coercion on the scans...

...especially with the knowledge that people can refuse scanning, and undergo a wanding or pat-down instead. So that angle really doesn't impress.

A person who is titillated by submission/coercion is going to be looking for quite different pictures.

[nashville_brook]

42. well, you're just wrong. it is titalating to some sick individuals, and i'm glad you apparently

live in a world uninhabited by these people -- but the rest of us do. believe it or not, there really are SOME PEOPLE who would rather not give up our dignity and modesty for the "privilege" of travel.

as if ANY of this BULLSHIT has ever stopped an act terrorism... jeez.

[beac]

133. There are LOTS of jobs where potential perverts might find

"titillation"--- OB/GYNs, radiologists, mammography interpreters, hospital orderlies, Loehman's dressing room attendents, etc. That said, I don't think we should assume that the average TSA worker is any more inclinded to have indecent intentions than any other person who works in a job where they occasionally see people (or IMAGES of people) in a less-than-totally-covered-up state.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

94. in that case we should chuck regular medel detectors as well..

[ContraBass Black]

15. Those look like pictures from the official demonstration.

Notice that almost all of them are hiding pistols.

[silverweb]

23. They probably are.

And that's part of my point. I have little concern the scans of private citizens are going to wind up on the internet, as the OP suggested.

There's absolutely nothing personally identifying on the scans and the pictures are all very generic; they're only the least bit interesting if the person is carrying.

[bobbolink]

25. You seriously don't think there are perverts in all areas of the nation????

Really??????

I suppose you even think DOCTORS aren't "titillated"???

REALLY????

[silverweb]

27. That's not what I said.

First of all, there is a choice. People can refuse the scan. As an alternative, they may choose to undergo the same type of secondary screening they've been enduring for the past seven years with an individual wanding or pat-down.

I'm not advocating for the scan or the secondary screening, just pointing out the facts.

Otherwise, I believe my answers to the other three replies just above yours complete my commentary.

[bobbolink]

28. "Do you think anybody's really that bored as to find these titillating?"

Yes, actually, you did.

[silverweb]

34. You misapplied my comment.

I stand by my original statement because I wasn't talking about internet pervs but the agents viewing the scans.

First of all, the scans are deleted immediately after viewing. The only way they're going to get on the internet is if the TSA agent viewing them saves and posts them. The scans are rapid (approximately 30 seconds) and extremely generic. Any agent viewing hundreds of these images a day is unlikely to be titillated by them or willing to break regulations by saving/posting them. Hence, my concern for such a thing happening is minimal.

When I said "That's not what I said," I was responding to your questions:

You seriously don't think there are perverts in all areas of the nation????
I suppose you even think DOCTORS aren't "titillated"???
REALLY????

I did not say there were no perverts anywhere in the nation.
I did not say that some professionals, even doctors, don't get "titillated" -- although these scans are hardly in the same arena.

Once again: You are not being "forced" to disrobe or be viewed "naked." You have the choice of refusing the scan. As an alternative, you may choose to undergo the same type of secondary screening we've been enduring for the past seven years with an individual wanding or pat-down.

Furthermore, if something did happen to another plane, the outcries of "Why didn't you stop them?" and "How could they get through security?" would be echoing from every corner of the nation.

Granted, TSA agents need better training in courtesy and respect for passengers, with careful screening to keep out abusers, perverts, and power-trippers. However, aircraft security is and must be an issue of concern, and there are only so many ways to ensure it.

Personally, I hate flying and only do it once or twice a year when I absolutely have to. However, I have never personally seen a rude or abusive TSA agent -- and I've been very observant of those I did see -- in what must often be an exhausting and thankless job for little pay, dealing with sometimes irate, impatient, and rude passengers.

If you happen to get picked for secondary screening and don't want to be scanned, I suggest that you simply ask for a female agent to wand you.

And now I have to go to work. Enjoy your flight! ;)

[bobbolink]

35. I just go by peoples' words. When it takes a whole page to explain,

that's going a bit far, don't you think?

Maybe just a bit of reflection might actually shed some light?

[nashville_brook]

43. you may choose the fondling or the naked pictures. which will it be in FREE America?

[Lifetimedem]

8. That will hurt them

more than me ...My body will shock even the most hardy :)

[Historic NY]

9. If everyone flew nude there be no concealed weapons.....

:think: Gives new meaning to mile high club too.

[Speck Tater]

11. Tell that to people for whom modesty is a religious requirement.

I'm sure a Muslim man doesn't want some stranger looking at his veiled wife's naked body. Not to mention many Christians, including, but not limited to Amish, Mennonite, Southern Baptists.

If I held such religious beliefs I know I would be outraged by such a personal intrusion. (As a wrinkly old atheist/Taoist/Buddhist I'm sure my naked geriatric body would break the camera, so I don't give a hoot one way or the other.)

[pitohui]

21. or to perfectly secular people who have been raped, stalked, harassed, etc.

my body is private, not to be shared with the world, it takes a lot for some of us to trust and share our bodies

we don't need gawd to tell us what to do, it should be up to us who sees our bodies

and anyone who thinks these images won't end up being shared is nuts, even surveillance videos from casinos (mostly looking down women's tops) are privately circulated, and this is far more invasive than showing a bit more cleavage than you meant to

[Goblinmonger]

100. Oh Noes!!!1!!

The Amish can't fly anymore.

[beac]

135. No problem. They can get there by riding

Magical Leopluridons!


;)

[unapatriciated]

57. It's already been done

http://www.eturbonews.com/1087/nude-airline-take-germany


notice to mods..I didn't post any pics this time. But I am flying on Monday and will ask for a copy of my pic.;)

[readmoreoften]

80. Wow. Lucky pedophiles I guess huh? (goodness gracious)

:sarcasm:<--lest anyone think that was serious.

But seriously. How are the fundies going to travel?

[eowyn_of_rohan]

95. Do they have disposable seat covers?

ewww

[Rosemary2205]

14. I don't care about the "nudity" but do care about the medical consquenses.

People who fly a lot need to know what these "harmless millimeter waves" are doing long term.

[leftofthedial]

16. I'm sick of living in a police state

[bdamomma]

89. that's what it is becoming.

[depakid]

19. Let 'em look!

That'll drive the puritans nuts....

[bobbolink]

26. Being FORCED to be viewed naked is NO way to "cure" a nudity phobia.

Given that this is a society that places so much emphasis on women's bodies, and we're told from the time we're little girls that it's our fault if we're raped if we've shown "too much skin" (which is always a subjective opinion, of course), this is troublesome to most women, and TRAUMATIC to some.

It's going to be interesting to see just where the 'Murkin public will draw the line.

[undeterred]

29. When (xray) radiographs came along, people though they were indecent.

:shrug:

But I don't like all this loss of privacy either. It makes me feel more vulnerable, not safer.

[orleans]

30. maybe now we can prove to the world that george bush has no penis

and dick cheney has no penis!

scan those motherfuckers and let's put those images up on google!

[undeterred]

31. and a pea sized brain

[orleans]

37. that too. n/t

[SalmonChantedEvening]

33. And they deserve all the GAK it inspires.

:hippie:

[ThomWV]

39. Pity the poor bastard who has to examine the image of my body passing through.

Not a pleasant task.

[beac]

138. Maybe they could give us our images as we exit...

"Thank you, Ma'am. You are now free to board your flight, but you might want to re-consider that pre-boarding trip to the Terminal 3 Cinnabon."

;)

[Deja Q]

40. Does it not even show a fig leaf over Adam's or Eve's good parts?!

Wow.

[Avalon Sparks]

47. I'm sitting here wondering....

what if it's that time of the month? Would a sanitary device show up?

That would suck... for me that would be embarassing... dunno why

[mmonk]

49. Boy will they be disappointed.

[frogcycle]

50. the only reason the naked body is "private"

is artificial religious taboos

What if I decided that my face was private and wanted to walk into a bank, or board a plane, wearing a ski mask?

I am male, and I expect that all 6.5 billion people on the planet know what I have "down there"

big deal. ok, not so big. so what.

having some anonymous, bored security guard looking at a few thousand bodies a day is hardly a big invasion of each one of their private space.

[LiberalPersona]

76. it's not the only reason

There's other reasons people may not want their body seen.
Like for example, growths like tumors (which by the way I'd be wondering if these kinds of scanners could have a dangerous effect on), ugly scars, birthmarks, body modifications, private tattoos.

[readmoreoften]

81. How about opening up your anus for the guard? That okay too?

Is it okay for the "bored" (I love these assumptions) security guard to look at your naked 13 year old too?

[spoony]

87. Oh come on, the only reason people don't like gloved fists

up their asses at the airport and don't fancy people checking out their naked kids is silly religious taboos! Or, as I read upthread, because most people are fat and self conscious.

:sarcasm:

[readmoreoften]

145. If we weren't so fat and stupid we'd like standing naked on the curb for Neighborhood Security

Yes, because hot gorgeous girls who get ogled all the time will have no concerns about someone in a booth staring at their naked body.

Yeah, it's because we're fat and stupid that we don't like state intrusion. And we only get pissed off when they through away our liquid foundation at the security gate because we're too lazy to take proper care of our skin. And we only get pissed off when they throw away our 4 oz bottle of skin care vitamins because we're too lazy to "'eat right" which would give us good skin to begin with.

And we're only pissed off that they're putting us on conveyor belts to the soylent green slaughterhouse for poor people because we didn't work hard enough to be the leader in Multi-Level-Marketing Sales, the true mark of superiority.

[Zynx]

125. That would be why clothing of some form became pretty much universal

in the vast majority of societies?

[frogcycle]

127. no, warmth and protection from brambles played a part

long before the religious nuts decided there was "original sin"

[crikkett]

139. Don't forget the pockets.

Pockets are sorely missed when trying to negotiate the world naked.

Without pockets you have to hold everything in your hands.

[frogcycle]

141. and when I negotiate amongst brambles naked

I do hold everything in my hands

[lonestarnot]

54. Oh boy! I'll be in playboy next week!

:sarcasm: :applause:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

55. I wonder what John Ashcroft would say about this? He had a frigging naked statue covered up!

In all seriousness... We Are In A Police State!!!!

[Goblinmonger]

101. Hey

that statue was showing it's titty. Dirty, dirty titty.

[Carnea]

56. Now that you mention it I do have a concealed weapon.

Okay Okay I know but I'm sure at some airport in America there has to be at least one attractive screener person.

Either way it's about time we implement Total Recall technology outside of flat screen televisions.

[MindPilot]

58. The military cured me of any sense of modesty; so let 'em look.

And if this will in any way streamline the security process at the airport, I'm all for it.

[a la izquierda]

74. for freakin' real!

i would much rather have this done than get patted down. i've seen these scans before. there's not a shred of identifying info on them. they seem fast and efficient. i ALWAYS get held at security, so i'm all for it if this will speed it up.
i was a swimmer for 15 years. when you change in front of other people for that long, you just don't give a crap anymore. if a scan of me showed up on the internet, nobody would know it was me anyway.

[Buns_of_Fire]

59. If anyone thinks they're going to get off by seeing my nekkid bod...

serves 'em right.

[Eric J in MN]

62. "randomly chosen airline passengers"

It would be one thing if they only used these on people there was reason to suspect, and they told them about the X-Rays.

It's another thing to randomly choose them to be hit with low level X-Rays.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-06-05-bodyscan_N.htm

[leftofthedial]

64. poor bastards

[Orrex]

73. I don't know why the hell we don't just fly naked

Okay, maybe some sandals. And tasteful jewelry is all right, too.

But why bother with all of this hush-hush techno-peeping, when the answer is right there in front of us?

[rucky]

83. They've really improved on the x-ray glasses from the comic books.

I couldn't see anything in those things.

[readmoreoften]

84. How much you wanna bet they keep naked souvenir of transgendered folks

and pass 'em around to their buddies and laugh.

[TZ]

99. Doctors look at naked bodies all the time.

Do you see pics from docs posted on line?
So much else to worry about than this. Yeah some people might be unprofessional but I think most will be pretty non-chalant..believe it or not, after seeing thousands of images, I'm guessing most of them will be like..seen one, seen em all.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

102. Well, they'll teach 'em.

They'll revisit their snooping policy after seeing my naked body. Or develop some sort of pre-screening tactic.

[backscatter712]

104. I will not submit to the electronic strip search.

That's what these devices do - see right through your clothes - the images show everything, and I mean everything.

[Mojorabbit]

120. Neither will I

If this becomes the norm then it will be adopted in courthouses, schools, and everywhere else in the country. I say Hell NO!

[crikkett]

140. Show me!

I saw one screengrab upthread and it wasn't everything. It wasn't more than pantylines.

And I know how to fix that...

[backscatter712]

144. One of them showed some significant muffintop.

I don't want anyone seeing that from me. :puke: (I know, don't wear clothes that are too tight...)

[Zuiderelle]

107. I can't believe that anyone responding here thinks this is perfectly ok.

[seabeyond]

111. stopped paying my money to allow myself to be stripped of all rights long ago. BUT

the issue is not whether we are modest and dont wish others to see our nakedness or not. and we having a couple posters on du insist must all be equally brazen in our nakedness as they are is stupid and as arrogant thinking as those that insist we must all be modest, just hitting the other end of the spectrum, yet just as offensive.

the issue is a strip search without the ok from the person. the continued stripping of rights that we the people allow the last handful of years to the extent of at what point does this end. not even to the point of strippin the clothes off our body to see our naked body.

this is not about embracing the body or not and is adolscent at best to take it to that level.

[Indenturedebtor]

143. No kidding - this is a horrible practice on so many levels

Can anyone say "unwarranted search and seizure"?

I knew you could!

And to hell with this argument about "well they don't have to fly". You don't have to go to the movies either, should you submit to an anal cavity search every time you want to see a film? After all you could kill a lot of people by blowing up a movie theater!

How about for people who ride bikes? Maybe when you take a walk the police should be able to pick you at random and take you downtown for questioning.

Oh well I have nothing to hide so who cares?

Where do you draw the line? Can they come into your house and search it top to bottom at random? You don't have to own a home after all.

Maybe they should be able to read all your emails and listen to all your phone calls?

Oh but it doesn't matter, they should be able to look at you naked any time they so choose.

What in the hell are some of you in this thread talking about?

[seafan]

119. This is the stuff of Chertoff's dreams. Have we had enough of this administration yet?

US airport debuts controversial X-ray scanner ("virtual strip search"), February 24, 2007


A *chalk outline* is laughable. Not bloody likely.

(Scroll down to view the *chalk outline* of a passenger's body, required before boarding a plane.)

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

124. that's why I quit wearing pants to airports

[Recursion]

136. And how can I get this job? nt

[TXDemGal]

149. If a terra-ist has a weapon stuck up his/her ass

does the scanner detect it? What about something that has been swallowed and then is later vomited up on the plane? Enquiring minds....

That said, there's no way I'd go through one of these things. And I know for a fact that my 70-something year old mother will positively FREAK out if she learns that someone will basically see what she looks like naked if she goes through a body-scanner. Hell, I only ever saw her naked once in my life, and that was just a few years ago.

[crikkett]

150. I bet if this machine can discern breast implants = 100% guaranteed leering