mybodyismyown

"On at least three occasions prior to the incident that inspired this post, I went through the body scanner at airport security and then had to wait a moment longer or be rescanned. I knew that this was because they thought I was a guy, but then my body scan showed a body other than what they expected -- boobs, and no penis, to be specific. As a result, waiting in the security line when there is a body scan ahead has become quite anxiety-inducing for me. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/trista...ref=gay-voices


Salon responds here:

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/26/flying_while_butch/

WillCAD

Sorry, but I'm not going to castigate the TSA over this one.

There are certain physical indicators of gender, not to mention culturally-variable indicators in clothing, hairstyles, jewelry, makeup, etc. In some folks, the physical indicators are less obvious than in others. And some folks choose different modes of dress and style.

Those folks whose appearance is atypical know that it is - they have the same perceptions as the rest of us, they are raised in the same culture as the rest of us, they know the impression that their appearance will give off in their home culture.

Everyone is entitled to whatever appearance or behavior or identity they choose. However, it is illogical to be upset if another person misperceives their gender, when they know that their appearance is at odds with the physical reality of their gender.

In plainer language, using Tristan Higgins' article as an example - she looks like a guy. She knows she looks like a guy. She is absolutely entitled to that appearance. She is silly to be upset when others are confused by her appearance. If anyone has a problem with who she chooses to be, they can go take a flyin' leap, but confusion over her appearance, prior to clarification, is completely normal and understandable.

SeriouslyLost

Oh, right! Of course! I thought the scanners were there to check for concealed weapons and the like, not to confirm the gender stereotypes of the operators and public at large. My mistake.

FlyingHoustonian

Without getting into the general merits of pat-downs and MMWs (plenty of threads on big picture TSA policy fecklessness), it is a valid question under current rules if said machine finds something that needs resolution and a screener is needed for a pat-down, or even if it is an opt-out pat-down, or even if just WTMD that keeps beeping. Whether every machine can tell the difference between moobs and boobs I cannot say, but per the article the machine's software is built under certain gender presumtions to help resolve whether something is a weapon (how valid those presumptions are is up for debate it seems).

There are certainly different ways one could ask the gender questions if needed, some more polite and sensitive than others.

mybodyismyown

I am in the utmost disagreement with your post, WillCAD. And I'm surprised to hear you defend the TSA's unconscionable and pointless obsession with figuring out what our bodies look like under our clothes. There are millions of people out there whose bodies don't conform to the TSA's regulations in all sorts of ways. It's disgusting and unforgivable that the TSA has decided to pass judgment on whether our bodies are acceptable.

This really has nothing to do with gender presentation. The problem is that the TSA forces innocent travelers into machines that pass judgment on whether our bodies are acceptable or not. Human bodies come in many shapes, sizes, and variations, and people with non-normative bodies often do not display their differences openly. The TSA’s pathetic charade of security focuses on non-normative bodies and "outs" people whose body differences can be otherwise shielded by clothing. Humiliating passengers because they have mastectomies, ambiguous genitalia, non-normative gender presentation, tumors, or implanted medical devices does not prevent terrorism!

TSA apologists repeatedly claimed that having screeners examine nude images of passengers in the body scanner viewing rooms was kosher because, “We all have the same parts.” No, we do not. We absolutely do NOT all have the same parts. The TSA intentionally exposes and shames people who, for a multitude of reasons, have bodies that do not conform to the TSA’s standards. I know a wonderful woman with a prosthetic leg who abandoned her lucrative consulting career because she could not tolerate letting strangers physically assault her multiple times per week.

I recently tore my ACL and have had to wear a knee brace for the past six months. I’ve been intensely stung by a huge number of thoughtless and cruel remarks from strangers and friends about my injury. If I could have waved a magic wand and made the brace invisible I would have jumped at the chance. All difference and disability is socially stigmatized. People with non-normative bodies are marginalized, pitied, and even blamed for their conditions. The way TSA mistreats disabled travelers surely places the agency on the wrong side of the Americans with Disabilities Act; the TSA has shirked its responsibilities under ADA as under so many other laws.

In sum, the TSA's machine told Tristan Higgins that her body was unacceptable, therefore she was unacceptable.

SeriouslyLost

You're missing the point. But do feel free to explain why you think gender is relevant to whether TSA should let you travel.

Look, the variations on human anatomy are such that across the population of the US (especially the US given the obesity rates) gender determination is irrelevant to the screening by the machines: they're (supposed to be) looking for concealed weapons, not trying to figure out if that's a boy or a girl. Beyond that, with MMW, gender.is.irrelevant.to.security.screening.

BubbaLoop

The point here is that full body scans are inappropriate methodologically for the task at hand. They both can miss real weapons or explosives (orifices, folds, pancakes, etc) and, very importantly, have false positives all over the place (prosthesis, scars, gender issues, ostomies, etc.), inconveniencing many.

SeriouslyLost

That is entirely besides the point being discussed. I agree with you though: the machines simply can't do the job they are meant to. That's nothing to do with gender however.

Darkumbra

Question. What does her perceived gender have to do with security?

studentff

I always opt out so I don't see this part, but do the NoSs really have "male" and "female" buttons? Jeesh.

The bigger point, way beyond issues with gender perception and presentation, is that our body compositions are none of TSA's friggen business. Breasts--large, small, or absent. (Do overweight men with "man boobs" have issues with the gender-specific NoS? I would expect so.) Same with genitals (ask Rolano Negrin). Or missing limbs. Why does *any* of this matter for screening for WEI? It doesn't, and screening with this level of fine resolution is ridiculous when there are much less invasive means of screening for credible threats. (i.e., WTMD, ETD, and simple visual inspection for odd/large bulges.)

This woman's experience is part of the same problem that caused Rep. Sharon Cissna to have to take a boat back to AK (mastectomy scars). And has resulted in delays and harassment of amputees, those using medical devices, etc. I personally don't care how she presents herself, nor do I have a problem with the high likelihood I would misidentify her actual gender at first glance (which IMO she should accept/expect based on choosing to present in a non-conforming way), but I fail to see why TSA should be involved at all.

JoeBas

If they think she's a guy, then those boobies the scanner finds might be fake and filled with explosive shampoo...

FlyingHoustonian

First of all, I am not missing "the point", you seem to be missing it and trying to redirect to topics I did not discuss so I'll type slower for you, also do not put "words in my mouth" re: TSA letting one travel. I never said anything of the sort. Set up your strawman somewhere else.

If the TSA has a policy of having a certain gender clerk do the patdown for people claiming to be of the same gender then under the current rules the question is valid. Same thing if the software on the machine scans differently for suspected men and women. Whether that software is more effective is up for debate, though it would seem we don't have all the tech data available at the moment.

Of course the nude-o-scopes are inane, but as I said that is not the point here. And, much like the rest of us that dislike NoS, the person in the OP's story could opt out, and ask for a member of whatever gender they want to present as to do the pat(no pun intended)-down.

WillCAD

You're reading a lot more into my post than I ever intended, Summer, and bringing a lot more issue into play than I was addressing.

In my post, I never addressed the Constitutionality, effectiveness, or humiliation factor of the AIT scanners. I have pontificated at length on those issues in other threads, and my positions are fairly well known; for the record, I agree with you on those issues almost 100%.

Tristan's article was almost entirely about how angry and humiliated she was at being asked by a TSO whether she was male of female. She's physically female, but looks male by common US standards, she shouldn't be traumatized by this. It's like parents who choose neutral colors for all of their baby gear, then getting angry when someone asks if their baby is a boy or a girl. Babies have no visible gender-specific traits; of course people aren't going to know whether it's a boy or girl if everything you bought is yellow and beige! They're going to ask!

I don't see this issue as being specific to TSA. If you are physically one gender but dress and appear like the other, there are going to be times when this is going to cause awkwardness, such as using public restrooms, which are gender specific. At those times, you may have to state your physical gender for the record. People may ask you that question. If you know you're physically one gender but your appearance leads people to believe that you're the other, you have to expect to hear that question numerous times in your life. The question itself is perfectly reasonable and should not upset you, unless it's posed in a confrontational, humiliating, or derogatory fashion.

The situation with the TSO that Tristan described in her article did not seem to fit those criteria. Sure, it's uncomfortable and annoying that the vaunted magic machine can't automagically tell whether it's scanning a male or female body, but no more so than the fact that it can't automagically tell whether that's your boarding pass and ID in your front pocket or a cache of PETN explosives. And the TSO, according to the article, did not ridicule her or raise her voice or cause a scene or attract unwarranted attention - the TSO, uncharacteristically, asked the question politely and with no fanfare. And Tristan hit the ceiling, merely because she had been asked the question.

Hogwash. It's a machine; it doesn't think, it doesn't feel, it doesn't pass value judgements. It's a scanner that beeps and boops. It's a worthless piece of junk that is incapable of doing its intended job; those without ATR are a tremendous invasion of personal privacy and blatant violation of the 4th Amendment; the backscatter type are an obscene health and safety risk to the traveling public and airport personnel who work in proximity to them; and they're all some of the most expensive boondoggles in the history of our country. But they're still just dumb machines.

The machine didn't tell Tristan that her body was unacceptable, and in point of fact, neither did the TSO. The machine needs the input of the male/female buttons to filter out scan returns that are normal for male or female physical forms. TSOs push those buttons. This particular TSO had trouble differentiating Tristan's physical gender from visual observation alone, guessed wrong the first time, and asked (by Tristan's account, politely and professionally) for confirmation before the second scan so as to press the right button. Nobody refused to accept Tristan, her body, her physical gender, or her gender identity. Nobody attacked her, nobody ridiculed her, nobody humiliated her, and nobody drew unwarranted attention to her.

Her anger at what must be to her a very common and completely understandable question, posed in a polite manner without any apparent rancor or negativity, is illogical and silly.

---------------------------------------------------------------

On another note, I had ACL repair surgery last year, as well. Fortunately, mine went swimmingly well and I only had to wear the brace for 5 weeks. I was on crutches for the first 2, then used a cane for the remainder, and for about 2 months after the brace came off. I limped for about 6 months.

I never had a single cruel or thoughtless remark directed at me in that entire time; most people were cheerfully encouraging, some were indifferent. If your friend made cruel and thoughtless remarks about such a painful and difficult injury, you need new friends. If strangers make cruel and thoughtless remarks, well... crutches have more than one use, ya know. Whoops, sorry pal, I didn't mean to trip you, I'm a little handicapped these days, what with the brace on my leg and the crutches and all.

I hope you're fully recovered.

lostinthewash

Taking Sense Away blogged about this yesterday ... http://takingsenseaway.wordpress.com/

lostinthewash

Off topic, but my experience has been totally different. In the past year I went from able bodied to visibly disabled and I have noticed a distinct difference in the way people (friends and strangers) treat me. I receive deferential, considerate, kind, and yes, sometimes curious, treatment from 95% of the population. The other 5% are oblivious to everyone, not just me I have my series of answers for the people who ask "what happened to you", and I give an answer dependant upon how much I feel like talking in that particular moment. I don't begrudge their asking, and so far I haven't felt stigmatized, marginalized or pitied.