No rudeness intended, however, we passengers, in the beginning, can still "opt out" of the scanners (then we get groped) or stay home or we find another method of transportation.

This is not a good selection of choices, in my opinion.
-

In some respect, comparison to the Nazi regime is overblown. Nonetheless, in any social movement, there is a tipping point. DHS/TSA are not, yet, Naziesque in behavior. They still feel reigned in by American mores. Nonetheless, the majority American outcry for "security at any cost" surely has the totalitarians amongst them licking their lips.

TSH/DSA is way over the line. History tells us that Hitler/McCarthy/Bush will take all they are offered and more.

It needs to stop here, and stop now. If it takes Nazi comparisons to get the point across, they are not far from the mark.

With all credit to NWA, "F@*% the TSA!"

Well just like with FFs, if the flyer's livelihood (a Jewish person's livelihood, or simply did not have the means to emigrate) depends on flying, they do not necessarily have the means to avoid flying...

I certainly am, I even have a Facebook page and everything!

I appreciate your comments, that is exactly what I strive for, to be reasonable and respectful even when I am angry. Thank you.

I agree with you 100% on the bluster and name calling, it serves no purpose and if your arguments are sound, you dont need to do either.

Many TSOs are feeling the heat for the wrong reason (based on the POV presented by some of the posters here), most of the stress and heat TSOs feel is from someone transiting the checkpoint - for something they have no control over.

The "it's not true" or "it never happened" defense works just fine when "it's not true" or "it never happened". If something is claimed against the agency, it should be investigated, and a proper response should be given (giving the range of what I have read here, that can range from telling someone "hey don't do that again" to sending folks to jail).

In some cases you are completely correct, currently the structure that has TSA set up disagrees with you after a fashion. I think that if the stress and backlash against TSA builds to a point where the political leaders of the country begin to really take notice, some things may change - until that point (or until we reach a stage where we have other screening options that provide the same detection capabilities) we are in a quandry.

I have read the story, and I am sorry that you and she have had bad experiences - if I could change that, I would. Sadly, I can do nothing for either of you except make sure that the folks I work with and I do nothing to create a similar situation. I have not been there for any of the screenings (and since she is a female, I would not be there for it to begin with), and I have the story as it comes from her (via you). Based on your post, the TSO should have been much more polite and cooperative at the outset, I find when dealing with any customer that being polite and trying to work with them is better than telling them what to do. The TSO should also have been more understanding and take more care while searching the breats area, if a passenger has recently had surgery, then there should be some understanding and compassion. The area has to be cleared, but it doesn't have to be a manhandling, I myself actually learned a bit about recent surgeries in a thread here earlier this year - things that I had never thought of that helped me to be better prepared in a situation just like your mothers. The whole situation with the Depends is ridiculous and the TSO should be dealt with accordingly if everything happened exactly the way it is written - no excuses. I wish you and your family peace and better situations in the future, I hope that the next time you (or she) come through a checkpoint that there is no problem and the TSO is compassionate and understanding and works with you.

Thank you Coach!

TSOs may debate amongst themselves, who doesn't at work? I think that type of internal dialogue is integral to making improvements on a local level and in some cases can lead to changes on a national level.

TSOs may sometimes give the impression that it is an advesarial relationship (TSO vs passengers), but that is not the way it should be (and luckily, my airport does not have that type of an attitude in general). The only time I have seen that type of an attitude is when there is a serious conflict over something (and sadly that is the WORST time to exhibit that behavior - a little undersatnading and discussion can defuse a situation like this more often than not). That is natural human reaction - when challenged or threatened (I have seen plenty of both activities) we tend to bow down or become even more tenacious in sticking with it (fight or flight). I have found that treating passengers with respect and courtesy should be the standard, not the exception and do everything in my power to make that so.


"you will have initiated a chain of events that could literally end with a wall, several uniformed bodies slumped over in front of it, and a the words "Viva La Revolucion!" painted in blood on said wall."

Really? I mean.... really? Implied threats against a voice of dissent (and that is exactly what this was) is the best way to destroy your own cause. It makes you look like a fringe loony instead of a well reasoned voice in the discussion.

I understand the anger, the desire to make some positive change and to restore what you see as reasonable levels. I can take the "you guys suck", "your rules are stupid", "you are violating my rights", and even "you smurfs are underpaid, undertrained mall cop wannabes"... It's when folks start to level true junk statements and things that detract from the argument that I take umbrage. I just think that if you want to make some serious change, or to be a force for positive change, or even just make things go back to the "way they used to be" - it is simply better to attack your percieved enemy with well reasoned arguments and logical points than to level personal attacks. By using personal attacks the smartest person in the group can completely remove their effect in the debate by saying "you suck" or "you smurfs are Nazis" after giving the best argument I have ever heard against one of our policies. I don't hate you guys because we disagree on some things, I like the fact that you voice a different opinion because then I can learn from it.

So rather than make reasonable arguments in the public forums to sway more folks to your side, you are recommending what? Yell? Scream? Wear an opt out tshirt and stand on a street corner distributing leaflets? Are you trying to get yourself relegated to the "street preacher" hall of fame? You and I disagree on many fundamental things Mike, but dishing out hate filled diatribes is not the way to go, it will possibly get you a 1 minute news shot on a cable news network, but after that more people walk away thinking "what a nutjob" than sympathize with your cause - even if they agree in principle. This forum used to be a fun place to come and argue points in a decent fashion, and help each other learn - that must be on the way out right now. Sad, I have learned quite a bit here from folks like Coach and JK Huggins and even Boggie Dog (whom I think truly hates me) - they all make sound arguments sometimes, and I have learned a bit about what positive change I can make on a local level with a modicum of effort.

Fair enough, but what improvements made on a local level *have* been made on a national level? I mean, I first had to take off my hoodie (fine with that) in LAX, but the first time the whole line got a proper speech about how to get everything sorted was a year later in ONT...at 5am...kudos to that agent, trust me.

But, uh, right now?

So explain to me how a "little understanding and discussion" will keep my things safe while I get groped, and potentially forced to hand my prosthetic breast over to an agent? I'm not sure what the "understanding" I'm supposed to display here is given that a)there is no plan, b)the plan seems to be that I'm fair game to humiliate because of something I have no control over (again, didn't figure that it'd be awesome to get my breasts removed when I was 14...nor do I pick when to be bleeding), c)once getting groped, I can't touch my stuff, nor do I have any guarantee that it will be moved to safety, thus leaving it open to steal, and d)oh yeah, I'm told that because I'm different, it's *my* job to have a preparedness plan for this?

There's no "understanding or discussion" to be had unless you, unlike any other TSA agent, can tell me how I can fly with my dignity intact. It's a pair of freaking prosthetic breasts. The fact that it means that it's open season on my body and my possessions...that makes me incredulous. Silicone bags are a threat, but someone stealing my computer isn't the TSA's problem... You mean very well, and I see it in your posts that you are clearly a good person, but...how do you defend this system?

To be honest, there are several things that TSA has implemented nationally that began at a local level. We even have the Idea Factory (which for all it's foibles and shortcomings is a pretty decent tool) to begin moving ideas from the local level to the national one.

I was actually talking about the TSOs having understanding, compassion and discussion. I have screened passengers with a range of injuries, illnesses and surgeries and I have found that if I talk to them a bit beforehand, and ask what I can do to help them be more at ease during the screening (and not, I am not buying you a martini at the local bar TrollKiller) - it makes the process much easier on both of us. In your case 99% of the time, I am not going to be involved in screening your person. I know you didn't ask for the situation to be given to you, I know that silicone bags are not a threat to aviation security (side note - things disguised as silicone bags can be dangerous though), and I know that the whole screening process probably makes you all kinds of angry, embarrassed and frustrated. I do my best to make certain that the folks I deal with do not feel that way - and I challenge every single TSO anywhere to do the same. You going through security will probably never be a comfortable experience (until we get those cool scanners from Mars in that Ahhnuld action flick..... stilll waiting.....), but with a TSO that takes a minute and finds out your specific needs and situation, the entire process can be respectful and as expedient as possible, while giving you the chance to give some input into the situation, and THAT is what I am after.

The problem may well be with the system from your point of view, but from mine, it is TSOs not taking the extra minute to make certain they help the person in front of them, if we help the person first, it is simply better all the way around. Following SOP is also a biggie for me, 99% of our procedural problems would solve themselves if more TSOs adhered to the SOP tightly. As for the policy disagreements, that is way above my pay grade and has to come down from on high. The system is not broken, the way it is applied is sometimes broken.

That is very nice of you but the situation where a passenger should even need to talk to a screener about their medical situation has already crossed the line of what is inappropriate. Personal medical discussions are to be had between doctor and patient. No one else.

If we are at a point in time where a passenger can only minimize their harassment at an airport by discussing their medical problems with government employees, then we are already FAR beyond the line of privacy and decency.

But the olives have a calming effect. Or maybe it's the vodka. I don't really want to have to talk about differences when a)going through the AIT machine is clearly going to get me groped, when b)opting out creates a ridiculous scene, and c)might get my name put on some list. It's a lose-lose proposition, and I don't really understand why I'm supposed to believe the system isn't broken when I start right off the bat with two bad choices.

Ahnuld can make movies again now. Don't worry, I'm sure he'll solve the aviation security issue singlehandedly in some completely irrational, hilariously bad movie that I'll still plonk down 9.75 to see. I think the problem is that if the game involves the, ahem, "zip-a-dee-do-dah," as discussed in another thread, there's something wrong already. When you throw in that whole problem that the TSA agent can grab my freaking prosthetic breast out of my bra, which *has* happened, and then insist it go through the X-ray machine... we've got an even bigger problem.

I think the problem's deeper than just that, and I do understand that it's above your pay grade. Trouble is that the TSA seems to attract a number of people, present company certainly excepted, who are more focused on using policies to make peoples' lives difficult. There's been absolutely *no* proof that a prosthetic has been used to smuggle explosives on board a plane anywhere but Russia...in 2003 or 4...and if you've ever dealt with the corrupt joke that is Russian airport "security" you know that it's a porous system.

My husband and I sat there tonight discussing all the other things that would make much more effective hiding methods than prosthetic breasts, and...it's a pretty chilling list.

Nevertheless, SOP allows all the things I've discussed previously: lose-lose choice, getting berated or put on a list for opting out, or causing "anomalies" which have led to some ugly situations for women with prosthetics...followed by the TSA's strange interest in my genitalia and making sure I'm not trying to get on a plane with a maxi pad keeping me from bleeding all over myself...and no plan for security of my carry-on items whatsoever. So, my vulva: high priority for TSA interest. My prosthetics: Who knows, as there's no plan...and the TSA defends whatever it does. (Pistole still hasn't apologized to that FA from North Carolina...) My laptop or cell phone: Go ahead and steal it, the TSA doesn't give a rip...because that's SOP. Other people can take your stuff, just not you.

It's broken. The system is broken.

I agree with you that medical discussions are between you and your doctor. What I am talking about is speaking to the passenger to find out what they need to get through the screening process. By SOP, the passenger has to be screened until protocol is met (there is that SSI thing that makes discussions here so difficult for me), many of the folks coming in know what the process is, many do not. As a TSO they need to explain what has to happen for the passenger to be cleared and proceed and what they can do in cases where the passenger needs some accommodation or specialized screening - say in the case of an injury. I do not need to know your medical history or what the reasoning behind the request is, simply what I can do to make it as low stress and non-painful as possible. If you come through and there is an alarm - we are to make certain that it is not WEI. When we have that alarm, talking to the passenger about what we can do to help is simply what I have found that makes it easiest on the passenger (and in turn on myself as well). This is something I think we should do a better job of communicating to our workforce as a whole.

Opting out *should* never cause a scene (I understand that it has and may continue to - I am not happy about that mind you), it is simply something that some passengers will choose from the beginning on. To be honest, I am not up to speed on the procedure for clearing a prosthetic breast because I will not be involved in patting passengers down (I am a BDO). I also don't think your name should go on a list because you are unhappy about being screened - I mean, who actually likes being screened at the airport? If you are vocal about your dislike, you should also not be *retaliated* against - you should be screened to clear you of possible threats and off you go. The sending a prosthetic breast thru xray.... I have nothing on that, I have never been involved in a situation where that would be a part of the process. Have you filed a complaint with TSA? Honestly, if you haven't please file it with the agency here : https://contact.tsa.dhs.gov/DynaForm.aspx?FormID=10

And with the specific airport it occurred at here : mailto:[email protected]
They have consolidated a lot of the contact info, so it is streamlined through HQ... This is good because now HQ has a copy of any contact coming in and can address airports with a larger than average share of contacts, bad because it may take a bit longer for someone at the specific airport to contact you.

One problem with not screening to threats that do not have a long history of usage (such as the prosthetic breasts) is it only takes one usage to make a profound impact. No one had ever thought of using a wooden horse to hide soldiers in until the Greeks tried it. I do not mean to make light of something that is important to a number of folks, just to indicate that lack of usage in a particular method of attack does not mean it is not still viable. The same argument can be applied equally to the (to use normal speech patterns found here) the "shoe carnival" and the "war on water" - they are methods that have failed in the aviation theatre, but they are still viable options when it comes to trying something. Are they something that we are likely to see often? Nope, but with a plane of 200+ people that is a pretty big gamble to take when the methods have been proven out (at least to my standards, and I have a fairly skeptical side).

You and your husband have hit upon the biggest challenge in security (not just with TSA, but security in general), the ability to do damage is only limited by the level of ingenuity from the person attempting to do the damage. Sadly there are large numbers of fairly creative people out there that want to harm other people, not just Americans - there was a suicide attack in Sweden this morning... I mean Sweden? Wow. That will always have the vast majority of security oriented agencies and companies playing catch up on their best days, it is simply the nature of the world today. (sad isn't it? Kinda makes getting fussy over whether we wore the cool hairstyle in college seem pretty silly nowadays doesn't it?)

I can't pretend to understand how you feel when you come through beyond the normal ability to relate to anger and frustration, but I would love to be able to help alleviate as much of that as I can. I may never have a direct impact on you when you travel, but by listening to what you say and forwarding it through the workforce, maybe I can positively impact someone else that comes through in a situation similar to yours. I can also relate to the policies not being popular (I was in the Army for 8 years, I hated many of the policies we had). I just hope that as an organization we can do a better ob of communicating with passengers in a respectful way - it would help us a great deal not just in the PR department, but in helping people as well.

P.S. I am more of a Whisky or Dark beer guy myself, it just smooths the rough edges off of a lot of things! Had a bad experience with Vodka when I was young and stupid. The olives are not bad though.:D

Show one reputable medical source that state the above other than a doc's opinion. Johns Hopkins independent review and the association of radiology docs both disagree with you. All you are posting is "s are" tactics based on NO evidence

Personally I do not know of anyone who is unhappy about being screened. Pissy and Nappy keep trying to say we don't want screening. Now you are saying that too. YES we do want screening and we do want security! But we want it to be unintrusive, reasonable, lawful, and respectful.


If you use this argument then we can also use the following objects as a security threat as well:

1. Laptop computers (hit upside the head)
2. Sedative medications (drop a few in the FAs drinks)
3. Belt buckles (a good hard whap across the face)
4. Insulin (a hefty dose of IM insulin could drop someone in just a few minutes)

...etc, etc, etc....

Just because something could be a threat does not mean it is a viable threat. This is where everyone has to sit down together and say, OK, what is reasonable? By your argument above, we should all be flying nude and handcuffed. That's where that one is headed.

It's not *my* experience. I'm done flying because of this whole mess, at least until something gets figured out that doesn't treat me like a shameful freak who makes a good theft target. However, there are definitely multiple reports of prosthesis removal, often centering on airports that people often mention dreading (Boston, O'Hare and San Diego) and, frankly, it's not too hard to believe given that, once again, there's no procedure. There's no reason for a woman posting on a board for women with less-than-optional mastectomies to lie. The "collecting information" thread is elsewhere on here, and I think there's enough stories about opt-out trouble that there's definitely an issue, or getting disespectful behavior for insisting that the TSA agent change their gloves. If the gloves are going to be swabbed, and they've touched someone else...that's an issue. That said, I applaud that you're taking the high road in encouraging communication.

See also, security of carry-on baggage. Hate to repeat it, but why is there *no* procedure other than that I can't touch my things? I get that I can't, but why can't a TSA agent obtain the baggage and segregate it so once cleared, only I can get it? These things are not rocket science, which is good, since I know nothing about rocket science. If anything, this is the thing you should be advancing up the food chain, as it'd at least remove the threat of theft and is something that can easily be resolved without changing the scanning program. You can swab my laptop for all I care, just get it the heck off the conveyor belt so nobody else can grab it.

Fair enough, but taking off your shoes, pain in the butt, not the end of the world. No water through the C/P...well, make of it what you will but it's annoying. These two things don't arise to the mess that AIT scanners and their results create for someone with adaptive equipment; plus, shoes and water, pain in the butt for everyone, whereas this...this targets a select group of people. I've made it clear from the get-go that I have no problem with the whole "they're gonna see me naked" thing, it's all the other trouble that comes with an "anomaly."

I think my hairstyle's pretty cool...but the bad part is that I'm still in college. No, wait...part of the problem is that your point is completely correct, but the TSA needs to find a better way. I'd be happy to go into a private room and pop the suckers out if that's all that got searched after I went through the AIT (so long as it's a MMW device) and if I were guaranteed an impartial witness...but you and I know that's not the case. If the "anomaly" is my chest...it makes no sense to have to pull the whole grope act. And then there's the witness part: even American had never heard of providing an airline rep for such a thing, and without an impartial observer, I fit multiple categories of person who bad things happen to without observation. I used to trust the TSA, so it was less of an issue, but much of that trust has been eroded by the actions of the past year and the fact that my home airport no longer has any checkpoints without backscatter machines in use.

As for the continually changing issues in security, yeah. I filled more paper with possibilities than I should admit here.

I get where you're coming from (hey, is this some BDO thing?)...but I don't know how to bridge the gap in that there is this terrible lack of procedure, and the culture of the TSA does not reward efficient, professional service. It makes me happy that *you* seek to provide it, and I get that the onslaught of changed rules and passenger behavior makes a lot of TSA agents annoyed.

These stories make wretched PR, and they're costing airlines money. I was worth about $3000 to American in 2010; some of it discretionary, some paid by others. In 2011, I'm worth $0. This can't make sense. I looked at the seat map for the trip I canceled, and there's multiple empty seats on the 22nd and the 29th on both legs of the flight, both ways. AA isn't known for operating empty planes. People are staying home, it isn't just me. I'm perfectly willing to admit that the MMW machine in and of itself wouldn't be the end of the world, but I am troubled that, as I've mentioned before, anything I choose comes with the same results. When faced with a game you always lose, you can only choose not to play.