Women Travelers - What do women think about body scanners / nude-o-scopes?

What do you, as women, frequent travelers and citizens, think about the use of Whole Body Imaging machines that see through your clothes?

Here are some links for more info in case you aren't "in the loop":

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1037592-fighting-wbi-invasion.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1038298-cnn-wbi-can-store-images.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1034985-video-nude-o-scopes-action.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/987486-list-airports-body-imaging-scanners.html


Even as a man who has no problem going to a mixed sauna or changing at the beach without the use of a towel, I find this is an invasive technique. As a frequent traveler (not as frequent as most here) I find it will not enhance security in the least (see tampon paradox) and only cost more time. As a citizen I find it completely outrageous and violating my right to privacy and the right to my own image.

Strangely, perhaps (you tell me), I'd much rather get a pat down, even if that involves them groping my genitals, and look these old pervs right in the eye with a vicious stare to make them feel super uncomfortable. If they did dare to touch me I would complain every time without fail.

As a related side note, it seems the groin groping on men is fairly common in FRA. I consider this to be very discriminatory. They only do this with men as far as I know because they'd get into trouble if they touched a woman's genitalia.

What do you think? I am curious to hear what you have to say.

Till

I also find the WBI's outrageous and would rather have a pat down. To be quite
honest if those machines will be made mandatory for all passengers my days of
flying are over.

I agree with you both. I absolutely refuse to go through the WBI. Often enought I get secondary in certain airports due to my insulin pump so am used to the pat down anyway. DFW snookered my hubby into WBI on a flight without even giving him an option and I threw a hissy fit.

A quick reminder that we have a Travel Safety and Security forum for general discussions regarding airport security concerns. I can understand why this question was posed here, but if the answers are of a general security nature (discussions of the effectiveness of the scanners, El Al security, etc.) the thread will be moved to the other forum. I have deleted a few posts.

l'etoile
Women Travelers moderator

While I think it's inappropriate, it wouldn't bother me. It's like pick your poison, pat down, scan........they're both about the same to me with the scan being less up close and personal.

Bobette

OTOH, I go topless on beaches. OTOH, I have no expectation that 'good' images won't find their way onto the internet at some point. So I'm more against than for, just because of that aspect.

OTOH, I go topless on beaches. OTOH, I have no expectation that 'good' images won't find their way onto the internet at some point. So I'm more against than for, just because of that aspect.

Wait. I don't get that. In my logic, if you are cool enough to go topless and you don't fear images getting out, you should be rather pro scanner or at least not against it so much.

Obviously, I posted the question because women supposedly have a higher sense of privacy in regards to what they show or what is seen. So I wondered whether that will have a bearing on your reaction towards the WBI scanners. As l'etoile said, general observations can go to the Security forum. Links are there already.

Keep it coming. I am keen to hear more.

Till

Wait. I don't get that. In my logic, if you are cool enough to go topless and you don't fear images getting out, you should be rather pro scanner or at least not against it so much.

Obviously, I posted the question because women supposedly have a higher sense of privacy in regards to what they show or what is seen. So I wondered whether that will have a bearing on your reaction towards the WBI scanners. As l'etoile said, general observations can go to the Security forum. Links are there already.

Keep it coming. I am keen to hear more.

Till
I think I've not explained myself that well.

I do go topless on beaches. But the thing with going topless is that you are not doing it to titilate (excuse the pun :D), you don't particularly want to be ogled at - you do it because it prevents nasty strap marks, and its the easiest way of doing that. When I've done it, >50% of the women on the beach are also topless, and no-one really bats an eyelid at it. In fact, if I felt i was being leered at and ogled at while on the beach, topless, I'd probably cover up again. While I don't mind being semi-naked in public, I do object to some reactions that some guys might have as a result, particularly when those reactions make me uncomfortable. There's a line between a glance of admiration and being watched with their tongue hanging out, knowing that the man in question is imagining you doing all kinds of things which you probably wouldn't even want to think about with him.

And as such, if you could guarantee the professionalism of all people monitoring the scanner, then I wouldn't have a problem. But sadly, I think that's impossible and you will get some jerks (for want of a better word) who will use the system for their own enjoyment or who will chose to make personal comments about those they see passing through their screens. Now, I can accept even that upto a certain point because if I don't know it's happening, then it's like it didn't happen. But the moment any passengers privacy is breached and any image makes its way to the internet for others to look at and 'enjoy' (or even to mock, they don't have to images of beautiful bodies - people with deformities or birth defects?) - that's the point at which I say, 'NO!'.

And since I think there's no guarantee that something like that will never happen - I'm more against it than I am for it.

Hope that explains a bit better!

Just wanted to say that I pretty much agree with Jenbel's post. I have exactly the same issue namely that it is not possible to guarantee the professionalism of everyone who monitors the scanners so this is why I am very much against them.

I'd rather be safe than dead -

I'm not all that distressed about somebody seeing the outline of my unclothed body. Having had quite some experience seeing unclothed people (think "medical", not "OMNI"), I can say that people pretty much look the same without their clothes as they do with their clothes on. Nobody looks 100 lb with clothes, and 200 lb under them. I can also say that I get ZERO thrills from seeing people in various stages of undress, and any (properly vetted) screener that stares at hundreds of images will probably feel the same way. In fact, I am more concerned that a screener will become SO densitized that he/she will lose concentration altogether and not do his/her job effectively.

It cracks me up that some people find themselves to be so attractive and provocative that a screener would be unable to resist their physical charms.

I do have a lot of sympathy for individuals with medical appliances that they would rather not disclose and believe that individuals with legitmate concerns should have alternate accomodations. But overall, WBI is probably faster than full body pat downs when it comes to screening large volumes of people, and nobody wants to have to get to the airport 4 hours before their flight.

While I think it's inappropriate, it wouldn't bother me. It's like pick your poison, pat down, scan........they're both about the same to me with the scan being less up close and personal.

Bobette

^ +1

I have been patted down very thoroughly a couple of times in my recent travels having been selected for secondary screening for explosives. I found those patdowns more intrusive than the one time I went through the WBI machine which was on a return trip to the UK from Amsterdam.

It doesn't bother me that they can see my boobs - images of boobs are everywhere, so my attitude to that is "so what?". In terms of genitals, for women there's not a whole lot to see on the outside anyway. Men may feel different because all their "bits" are vulnerable to plain viewing on the WBI.

What do you, as women, frequent travelers and citizens, think about the use of Whole Body Imaging machines that see through your clothes?Bring'em on especially if we can save time by not taking off our shoes.

I have no concerns about the scanners whatsoever. Given the millions of women that pass through airports daily I don't see a risk of a photo of me in the scanner showing up on the internet any time soon.

I also thought it was a bit silly that women complained about pat-downs a few years ago. I know it's intrusive, but so is an explosive on a plane. Sorry ladies, I just didn't understand this one.

I'm going to write my phone number in metallic paint across my breasts next time I fly just to see who calls :)

It's interesting to see the split on this apparently with a slight tendency to "I don't mind as long as it keeps me safe and is quick."

Below are two articles from the WSJ that address the risk when flying and doing other everyday tasks. It would seem that the risk is basically zero and that the government is just coming out with knee jerk reactions to make people thing they will be safer which in reality they won't or only by a degree so marginal that it doesn't justify either the civil rights or the financial cost. The links have been provided elsewhere here on FT and are not specific woman forum material but I thought I'd link them for your convenience and so that those who think it makes flying safer can get a better perspective.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704130904574644651587677752.html.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646963713065116.html

Till

I'm going to write my phone number in metallic paint across my breasts next time I fly just to see who calls :)

Too funny. Great idea, I think I'll modify it and write "Take a picture, why don't ya?"

I'm going to write my phone number in metallic paint across my breasts next time I fly just to see who calls :)

...and then her cell phone will ring, but it will be lost in her cleveage (hey, it's happened before). :)

I'm kind of meh about the scanner issue. I need to travel, so I will do whatever it takes to keep it safe.

I don't think it will make us any safer, but I'd rather be scanned than patted down. I find the pat-down invasive and I don't like being touched by strangers, especially in the breast or pelvic area.

I have little to no issues with public nudity and know that my body isn't going to totally excite a screener.

I'd prefer neither, but the poison I'll pick is the scanner - but only if it eliminates the pat-downs and having to take off shoes.

I went thru a scanner not long ago (before Christmas) because I had a leg brace on after tearing my hamstring. I showed them the brace and they said I had the choice of a pat-down or scan. I chose scan - yet they still insisted on patting me down after the scan because they saw metal on my leg -- DUH! I showed you the freakin' brace at the get-go and that's why I had the scan in the first place - Frickin' idiots :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

For those of us who fly a great deal, I have to consider the risk of more radiation exposure. Frankly I don't need more risk. I don't want to glow in the dark.

I prefer a pat down and have been through that a few times. I find it all ironic as I carefully plan what I am going to wear to travel to make the whole process and quick as possible. Even to giving up a bra!

And they threaten me with a scan!

I opt for the pat down. I'm not at all concerned with my body shown on the screen, but I have numerous other reasons for being opposed to the scanners that I won't go into in this thread.

For those who are in favor, I'm curious if you'd feel the same for your 13-year-old daughter who was wearing a sanitary pad. Or your grandmother in incontinence pads. Or your mother in a breast prosthesis. When these show up, are they going to be checked further to see if they are real or actually packed with explosives? If they are not going to be checked for these (which I would sure find an invasion of privacy) then couldn't terrorists also wear these, rendering the machines useless?

Has anyone gone through a WBI while wearing something that might cause a false positive alarm? Would you be willing to describe what happened? Was the object noticed? If noticed, how was the false alarm resolved? How long were you separated from your property (to include wallet/photo ID and boarding pass)?

Consider the possibilities for women travellers to trigger false positives:
1. Any woman between menarche and menopause who chooses sanitary napkins for menstruation.
2. Any nursing mother who wears pads in her bra to contain leakage
3. Any breast cancer survivor who chooses to wear an external breast prosthetic
4. Any woman who by chance or by surgery does not look as symmetric as the hidden observer expects
5. Anyone (male or female) who wears incontinent products
6. Anyone (male or female) who wears a medical device like an ostomy bag
7. Anyone (male or female) who is obese enough to have overlapping (hidden) areas

I am concerned that, as WBI becomes more prevalent, I will be one of these false positives required to undergo intrusive pat-downs every time I fly because I wear a breast prosthetic. I worry that a mere pat-down may not suffice and that I might be asked to remove the prosthetic and allow it to be swabbed for explosives. Not a very nice way to be treated after MANY years of federal service (to include several thorough background/security checks).

For those who hope that WBI will eliminate the requirement to send shoes through the X-ray machine, I doubt that will happen. TSA seems to be far too afraid of the possibility of a shoe bomb.

For those who hope for a quicker passage through the checkpoint, I fear you may be disappointed by WBI. Although a no-alarm WBI scan may be quicker than a pat-down, it is NOT quicker than a no-alarm WTMD. Even if it were, the WBI are larger than the WTMD and will consume more space at checkpoints - hence fewer but longer lines. Remember each false positive alarm will need to be resolved and each resolution will take time. This may be especially a problem for women if TSA is not staffed with sufficient female TSOs to resolve the number of false positivese among female passengers in a timely manner.

I opt for the pat down. I'm not at all concerned with my body shown on the screen, but I have numerous other reasons for being opposed to the scanners that I won't go into in this thread.

For those who are in favor, I'm curious if you'd feel the same for your 13-year-old daughter who was wearing a sanitary pad. Or your grandmother in incontinence pads. Or your mother in a breast prosthesis. When these show up, are they going to be checked further to see if they are real or actually packed with explosives? If they are not going to be checked for these (which I would sure find an invasion of privacy) then couldn't terrorists also wear these, rendering the machines useless?That is where profiling becomes even more necessary. Did the grandma or child travel with absolutely no luggage, buy her ticket last minute in cash and it's one way? What is needed is common sense protection.

If my child wanted to travel, this is the price of doing it until profiling is accepted as reasonable precaution like it is in Israel. I don't believe they have body scans.

Has anyone gone through a WBI while wearing something that might cause a false positive alarm? Would you be willing to describe what happened? Was the object noticed? If noticed, how was the false alarm resolved? How long were you separated from your property (to include wallet/photo ID and boarding pass)?

Consider the possibilities for women travellers to trigger false positives:
1. Any woman between menarche and menopause who chooses sanitary napkins for menstruation.
2. Any nursing mother who wears pads in her bra to contain leakage
3. Any breast cancer survivor who chooses to wear an external breast prosthetic
4. Any woman who by chance or by surgery does not look as symmetric as the hidden observer expects
5. Anyone (male or female) who wears incontinent products
6. Anyone (male or female) who wears a medical device like an ostomy bag
7. Anyone (male or female) who is obese enough to have overlapping (hidden) areas

I am concerned that, as WBI becomes more prevalent, I will be one of these false positives required to undergo intrusive pat-downs every time I fly because I wear a breast prosthetic. I worry that a mere pat-down may not suffice and that I might be asked to remove the prosthetic and allow it to be swabbed for explosives. Not a very nice way to be treated after MANY years of federal service (to include several thorough background/security checks).

For those who hope that WBI will eliminate the requirement to send shoes through the X-ray machine, I doubt that will happen. TSA seems to be far too afraid of the possibility of a shoe bomb.

For those who hope for a quicker passage through the checkpoint, I fear you may be disappointed by WBI. Although a no-alarm WBI scan may be quicker than a pat-down, it is NOT quicker than a no-alarm WTMD. Even if it were, the WBI are larger than the WTMD and will consume more space at checkpoints - hence fewer but longer lines. Remember each false positive alarm will need to be resolved and each resolution will take time. This may be especially a problem for women if TSA is not staffed with sufficient female TSOs to resolve the number of false positivese among female passengers in a timely manner.


Excellent post and excellent first post to boot. Thanks and welcome to FT, BC2004! :)

The sanitary pad etc question is very important I think. They will be visible. How can we be sure it's not explosives? The resulting "inquiries" would be highly time consuming and not dignifying for either party. This would be an even more inconvenient truth than the so-called tampon paradox that renders these machines useless in the first place.

You are also right about the concerns regarding the size of those machines. Wider machines mean fewer but longer lines. To the point where one might run into architectural problems of lines growing so much that they overlap into foot traffic areas of the airport.

I also now see the tricky proposition in WBI for women. Women are those that could be supposed to be most opposed to having their nude body displayed to random people. But more than that they might be opposed to actually being touched by random people. In addition, they are supposed to have a higher sense of security or fear, so they can be easily talked into letting WBIs being used, or so the devils behind the proposition may have reasoned. Tricky indeed.

Finally, I am really surprised to still read uninformed and naive statements like this one:"I need to travel, so I will do whatever it takes to keep it safe."

Till

That is where profiling becomes even more necessary. Did the grandma or child travel with absolutely no luggage, buy her ticket last minute in cash and it's one way? What is needed is common sense protection.

If my child wanted to travel, this is the price of doing it until profiling is accepted as reasonable precaution like it is in Israel. I don't believe they have body scans.

Yes, in a way I am for profiling, too. I'd call it common sense thinking, like you do. But it must also be clear that these profiles can be used to create vulnerable spots. So if someone wanted to commit an attack (s)he would avoid those points, i.e. simply check in some luggage, buy a return ticket etc. So these points are easily circumvented.

OTOH, it is not very likely that a grandma from Wisconsin or a guy from Ohio in a wheelchair will be turned into suicide bombers.

Till

I have been patted down very thoroughly a couple of times in my recent travels having been selected for secondary screening for explosives. I found those patdowns more intrusive than the one time I went through the WBI machine which was on a return trip to the UK from Amsterdam.
I haven't been through the WBI machine yet, but I've dealt with the the pat-down a few times and also find it intrusive. I'd take a machine over a pat-down anytime.

I have bigger things to worry about. This doesn't even measure on the radar.....

Just doesn't bother me.

What worries me is that, just like the TSA, folks on here are going "Grandma is safe"... hmm... No, folks she may not be....Don't you think a terrorist would have thought of that??? The current problem is that we DO actually profile. For example, flights from "SELECTED COUNTRIES" need more screening. GEE!!! A terrorist would NEVER fly to someplace like Amersterdam FIRST? Gee, a terrorist would never not be "middle eastern" (Exactly WHERE did Richard Reid come from???) And so on.... Moms with babies in thier baby carriage have set off bombs..... It's time to quit making "assumptions"

I'm going for the patdown. And this is coming from someone who a) was freaked out about everything after 9/11 to go on medication for a while and b) was a victim of inappropriately bad touch. Oh and c) wears bras whose cups fit as hats.

I'd choose a pat down every day of the week.

I don't want some strange man looking at prictures of my naked body. I am the only one who gets to decide who sees that.

And I've yet to see any real information about the safety of the WBI, either. We deserve to know the real risks. For us and . . . what if I were pregnant?

I have bigger things to worry about. This doesn't even measure on the radar.....

Just doesn't bother me.

What worries me is that, just like the TSA, folks on here are going "Grandma is safe"... hmm... No, folks she may not be....Don't you think a terrorist would have thought of that??? The current problem is that we DO actually profile. For example, flights from "SELECTED COUNTRIES" need more screening. GEE!!! A terrorist would NEVER fly to someplace like Amersterdam FIRST? Gee, a terrorist would never not be "middle eastern" (Exactly WHERE did Richard Reid come from???) And so on.... Moms with babies in thier baby carriage have set off bombs..... It's time to quit making "assumptions"

This is a good point. The UK just raised it's terror level because they have information that women suicide bombers, with western passports, may try to board planes in the near future.

Bobette

As a breast cancer survivor, I wish I had the luxury of worrying about someone seeing my tits. :) Just be thankful you've still got tits to be seen. I've been thru the imager at DFW and yes, it does pick up the prosthetics. so I just opt for a body scan and tell them why. And, no, it's not fun, but damned sure better than the option.

This is a good point. The UK just raised it's terror level because they have information that women suicide bombers, with western passports, may try to board planes in the near future.

Bobette

Government "intelligence" and "security" services serve themselves best by CYA moves like the above mentioned raising of the "terror level".

The last time women suicide bombers carried bombs on board a plane and detonated the devices, they were Caucasian women who could easily invoke liturgy familiar to millions of church-goers.

As a breast cancer survivor, I wish I had the luxury of worrying about someone seeing my tits. :) Just be thankful you've still got tits to be seen.Thank God you survived. Thank you for sharing that with us.

I'm going to write my phone number in metallic paint across my breasts next time I fly just to see who calls :)

ROFL I am meh on this one... my BF had to go through one in SFO, no biggy, i weaseled off through the metal detector LOL. I must look suspicious as a 5'2" White female as I am always getting secondaries in other countries. You should have seen YVR go through my bag like they found something LOL

I can also say that I get ZERO thrills from seeing people in various stages of undress, and any (properly vetted) screener that stares at hundreds of images will probably feel the same way. In fact, I am more concerned that a screener will become SO densitized that he/she will lose concentration altogether and not do his/her job effectively.


Hmmm. Same statement could be made about strip searches. So you're OK with those, too?:D

I seem to beep quite often (not sure why - it could be my watch), so I get pat downs quite often. I haven't been groped for quite some time (I have got really groped by a security screener many years ago) and I would prefer to be patted down, rather than take the unknown risk of the body scanner.

I have had more than my fair share of radiation since when I was very young due to injuries etc (literally dozens of CTs, X-rays, fluoroscope etc), and I also fly rather a lot (100+ sectors a year). I will also need a lot of X-rays and scans in the future as I am at a very high risk of osteoporosis and have a condition that needs monitoring through scans. So I would really like to minimise my unnecessary exposure to any form of radiation, microwave energy etc. So, I'd take a pat down any time, despite having been groped.

In addition, I would prefer to see who is looking at me. If there is a one-way mirror where I can see the screener but the screener can't see me, the body scanner is somewhat less unacceptable (except for the reasons above).

Besides, I also believe that a body scanner will merely drive any determined terrorists to conceal the explosives in their body cavity. What next? Compulsory colonoscopy and colposcopy before flying?!

I feel that it would be much more wise to deploy explosives detector. They are pretty non-invasive and not as much a risk to privacy, and probably more effective.

Hmmm. Same statement could be made about strip searches. So you're OK with those, too?:D

Well, no. But the argument goes both ways, should all females be wearing burkhas?

As a breast cancer survivor, I wish I had the luxury of worrying about someone seeing my tits. :) Just be thankful you've still got tits to be seen. I've been thru the imager at DFW and yes, it does pick up the prosthetics. so I just opt for a body scan and tell them why. And, no, it's not fun, but damned sure better than the option.

Thank you for sharing your story. I come from a family with many cases of breast cancer and wish you the best.

I am curious as to what they did once they noticed the prosthetic. Were you asked about it? Did they inspect it in any way, or do some kind of test to detect explosives traces? Because if they are doing nothing, just accepting your explanation, I don´t see how these scans increase security at all.

Yes i have wondered how do these ladies weaing burkas get through security /passport as with photo identity ,as photo should match face

I don´t see how these scans increase security at all.

They don't! That's precisely the point. You could smuggle sufficient explosives to blow up the plane in body cavities, especially women. So they'd have to do full x-rays, cavity searches or dogs sniffing everyone's crotch to ALL passengers. Horrible thought, no? And then there would still be the risk of ground crew sabotaging the plane and luggage.

Till

They don't! That's precisely the point. You could smuggle sufficient explosives to blow up the plane in body cavities, especially women. So they'd have to do full x-rays, cavity searches or dogs sniffing everyone's crotch to ALL passengers. Horrible thought, no? And then there would still be the risk of ground crew sabotaging the plane and luggage.

Till

I fully agree regarding the complete uselessness of WBI. In addition to that, I am very curious regarding how the TSA is using these images. In particular, how they "resolve anomalies". This woman seems to have had a direct experience which could bring some light to this point.

I fully agree regarding the complete uselessness of WBI. In addition to that, I am very curious regarding how the TSA is using these images. In particular, how they "resolve anomalies". This woman seems to have had a direct experience which could bring some light to this point.

Yes, indeed. My outraged comment was just that. I didn't mean to distract from this really good question. Sorry. I would like an answer to that, too. If it were for safety, they'd have to literally strip search women with a breast prothesis just like they make wearers of artificial limbs take them off to screen them. If they don't do that it is a huge security loophole. And if they do it, it is a huge offense to women who have been through an already horrible thing (my mother has, but she was lucky that they caught it early). So I feel quite connected to this woman specific issue (men get breast cancer, too, btw) as well as to the overall question of security vs. human dignity, besides the pragmatic question of what makes sense and if it is a good use of tax payer money.

Till

If it were for safety, they'd have to literally strip search women with a breast prothesis just like they make wearers of artificial limbs take them off to screen them.

It is against TSA policy to require prosthetic limb wearers to remove them:

# Security Officers will not ask nor require you to remove your prosthetic device, cast, or support brace.

# During the screening process, please do not remove or offer to remove your prosthetic device.


From http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/specialneeds/editorial_1370.shtm

It is against TSA policy to require prosthetic limb wearers to remove them:



From http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/specialneeds/editorial_1370.shtm

That is good to know. Then I witnessed TSA abuse twice. My remark was based on me seeing this happen and I was disgusted.

Till

To TexasFlyer. As one breast cancer survivor to another, congratulations on still being alive. Thank you for sharing your experience. Your comment is the first confirmation I have read that the WBI or ATI (scanner) can detect breast prosthetics. Did your experience with the WBI/ATI happen before or after the recent increased emphasis on scanners following the 25 Dec 09 incident? When the scanner detected the prosthetic, how did the TSA resolve the detection? Was this more or less intrusive or about the same as what happens when you opt for the pat-down rather than the scanner? Any information that you are willing to share will be greatly appreciated in making my personal decision of what to do if I am confronted with this choice in the future.