On one hand you have a point, but then again those names highlight what people don't like about them, and why folks feel that they are an invasion of privacy. Is "naked scanner" better, as it's certainly more descriptive of what the scanner does than "body scanner", and not as inflammatory as some terms you posted? Interestingly enough, the images produced by the scanners are considered child porn in UK, so depending on jurisdiction, they literally are "kiddiepornmachines".

That attitude is natural and common, because these new measures are easily perceived in sexualized terms - because most people in our society connect viewing of naked bodies and touching genitals with sex, and when done improperly, with sexual abuse.

This is actually at the core of the outcry, more so than academic debates about violations of any 'rights'. We've come to expect some level of intimidation and bullying from airport security. Most of us have adapted to it, and simply roll our eyes as we shuffle through checkpoints - mostly because we know that humiliations suffered by ourselves and our loved ones are minor and fairly trivial, for the most part. Then suddenly, everything acquires a sexualized component overnight and things don't look nearly as harmless. Not only is the general humiliation that can be visited on people has suddenly shot up into the stratosphere, but now there is a very real possibility of sexual exploitation of some sort.

So yes, there is a huge sexual component to the whole thing, and it's not going away until the procedures and technology are changed.

Besides, if you walk through an airport with an attractive woman you'll notice how much extra attention she gets. Most of it is harmless and commonplace, but in light of the sexual component I was talking about, it starts feeling pretty sinister.

You are completely correct that child abusers are usually known by their victims, but that's not a reason why parents should be comfortable about strangers touching their kids either. LEOs aren't allowed to touch people's children in that manner without probable cause, which is a very important protection.

There is also a power issue here - when a stranger is touching a child, especially in that manner, his parent has full legal power to stop what's happening, or at least try to. In case of medical personnel, the parent probably chose them - and that's really about the extent of "strangers" that are allowed near kid's private areas, my aunt certainly has no reasons to be there.

At the moment, parents are uncomfortable with the fact that they have to be forced to stand aside and let strangers touch their children, not only in highly invasive and personal ways, but also without any known boundaries - and they are pressured to comply regardless of what may take place or what discomfort may befall their kids. They don't know when a TSO is deviating from SOP and is being exploitive, and speaking up or trying to stop what's happening means risking arrest, civil fines, and a missed flight that most people simply can't afford. For most people, the prospect of having to stand by and do nothing is pretty scary.

This is definitely a huge issue, but the policies themselves are very open to abuse.