While Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s failed bombing attempt of the Amsterdam-Detroit Northwest flight may have given the Dutch city’s Schiphol Airport a better reason to implement full-body scans, there were already plans in place to start using the invasive technology, something CNN, at least, fails to note in its report. But CNN does expound on the controversy over the scanners; namely, how they will be able to see through your clothes and right down to your bits and pieces (and maybe even that cellulite on your ass). Even the European Union says the scanners go to far in violating individual privacy rights. But what CNN doesn’t show you, even in this report on just how invasive the scans are —
— is that these things really are deep penetrating. CNN reports “the scan results would first go through a computer, which would then flag any suspicious items to a human,” and only then would another person take a look at your wang.
Oh really?
Oh. And it’s not just the Dutch who will have their T&A screened; Chicago’s O’Hare International is getting the devices next year.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
terrwill
I am sensing more potential boner bombs in Taylor Lautner,
Zac Efron, Ashton Kutchers, and maybe a dozen or so others
tighty whiteys!! How do we get these potential targets
inside one of these devices pronto?????
Fitz
Are people afraid that the security staff will learn that they have a big stomach and a little pee pee? is that what this is all about?
terrwill
No. 2 · Fitz: methinks its more of the concerns about the
little pee pee. I think we will be seeing a lot of people
sporting buttons proclaiming “I’m a grower not a shower!!”
in airports in the comming months…… : P
Joseph
If it makes air travel safer, I don’t care who sees my junk.
Tina
They already passed regulations a few months ago forcing us to declare gender on our plane tickets. Now are they trying to enforce that by checking genitals? Seriously, I will never fly again if they start using those things. Its getting too rediculous and dangerous for trans people.
James
I’m more concerned about the privacy of us transpeople whose private parts are not always attached to us (such as transwomen with falsies or transmen with packers). In an effort to figure out what that inorganic blob is showing on the screen, the powers that be will be stripping us (literally and figuratively) of our dignity and privacy. I’m all for safety and I’m willing to give any info necessary, including outing myself, but I would not be comfortable having a stranger examine my body and my prosthetic parts. It would be degrading for anyone to go through, let alone someone whose gender would then be put in question and likely ridiculed.
James
Sorry Tina, I was writing my response when you posted yours and now it looks like I was responding to you! Obviously I think we’re on the same page. 🙂
Fitz
I don’t know how to resolve this question of being able to examine everyone and everything while showing a little compassion and dignity for transfolk. I know that if I were a transperson flying, especially in or out of some hick town, I would be terrified to have the screen have that kind of information about me.
FakeName
If it makes air travel safer, I don’t care who sees my junk.
It won’t make air travel safer. None of these asinine regulations make air travel any safer and a lot of them (the liquid size limits for example) don’t even have any basis in reality. Others lead to the abject humiliation of passengers at the hands of the TSA. I’m sure everyone felt much safer after this woman was forced to pull out her piercings with pliers. http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/28/nipple.ring/index.html It’s all a scam to get people to give up more and more of their personal liberty in exchange for the failed illusion of security.
But hey, show us your junk anyway.
terrwill
Thats because there is such fear of “offending” those
groups who have perpetuated these terrorist acts. It is
disgusting that we have to be concerned about having our
three piece sets viewed for all to see because these scum
bag subhuman islamic facisits are desparate to meet their
72 virgins. What I would suggest is that everytime one of
these lunatics blow themselves into fragments, the pieces
are gathered up and then photographed. Publicize the photos
with the caption ?? ???? ????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??????? 72?
terrwill
Damm you Queerty! the arabic typeface did not show up from the cut and paste!
What is said was “still think you are going to get lucky with the 72 virgins?”
JR
Scary but sexy at the same time!!!
I don’t mind that people look at my junk… All they will see is a hot bubble ass, six-pack and nice dick. Need references? I can pony up!
What bothers me is the further infringements of our principal rights here. Big Brother is here and nobody is scared shitless??? Well I am and am an ant fart away from moving to the Antarctic… Not a huge conspiracist, but this whole bomb plot smells very fishy and almost seem like a very promising way for the powers that be to chip away at our rights even more and with impunity!!! They let that crazy on that plane to be free to attempt what he did… there is proof to that effect!
terrwill
No. 12 · JR: Yes we do in fact require refernces!! : P
Fitz
If you really want to be safe, everyone would strip down, wear a paper gown for the entire trip, and have zero personal items with them.
Or better yet.. which sound like heaven to me anyway…
have doctors knock everyone out for the entire flight. It’s hard to do shit when you are asleep.
romeo
I, too, have no problem with displaying my junk, other than the inferiority complex it will give male airport security. LOL
But seriously, I’m sure there will be rules about who gets to see your goods to head off potential lawsuits by the under-endowed, etc., which will protect trans people. They’ll probably make it a federal crime to share screening info. They’ll probably make the monitors covered or something.
But what about terrorists using butt plug receptacles? I don’t want to get crude here (actually, I do) but can you think of a more anal bunch than these terrorists, and what could be more likely? Will these machines show those sorts of things? Of course, those people that just like to wear butt plugs under their business suits will be S.O.L., but c’est la vie.
Fitz
It’s not true that just the poorly hung get shy. My ex was like a tri-pod, and he hated showing off.
romeo
Exploding butt plugs. We truly live in perilous times. Not to mention ludicrous.
terrwill
No. 16 · Fitz: That poor bastard!! : P No, truly the most unfortunate souls are the growers, not showers. I dated someone once when soft had a minus rather than a penis. Yet once the blood started flowing it became a massive,throbbing, glistening peice of manhood just awaiting a giving mouth… (forgive me I am remembering : P ) Far too many persons view a small flacid pee pee and don’t realize that it can truly transform into a wonderful HUGE suprise……
Fitz
I’m no size queen. Great sex doesn’t require circus tricks.
Jack
I have to say something about this. It’s the illusion of security. The play is the thing. It’s a distraction. And somehow no one is talking about luggage in all of this. No one is questioning sensors that could detect particles from bombs.
It isn’t a question of privacy for me. It’s a question of it will work. And who will be subjected to it. Will celebrities? Will politicians? Does a terrorist carry the correct credentials?
This is a Weapon of Mass Destraction (yes, I spelled that correctly).
B
In No. 2, Fitz wrote, “Are people afraid that the security staff will learn that they have a big stomach and a little pee pee? is that what this is all about?”
The millimeter wave and backscatter x-ray devices can’t see your
stomach, but can see your waistline, your ‘package’, and possibly what sort of underwear you have on. Both can see if you are wearing a cock ring. All the images are in black and white and are a bit fuzzy in comparision to photographs.
The real privacy concern is that someone in the back room might be looking at the images, laughing at them, and maybe copying them (e.g., with a small camera) to post on some Internet site, complete with a recognizable face, body shape, etc.
The other concern you should have with the X-ray machines is safety. They are designed to use minimal amounts of radiation, so the question is whether there are any failure modes in which a lot more radiation might be generated. If they screw up, given sleazy American practices that are so common today, they will try to deny it and to get you to pay as much of the medical costs and other expenses (including loss of income) as possible. You got cancer due to a malfunction? Well, how did the tobacco companies react when people realized what that industry’s products were doing? Unless the machines use an x-ray source incapable of producing more than trivial amount of radiation, the best way to protect yourself is to take a dosimeter along so you can measure what you are doing yourself.
If this sounds overly cautious, there was a case some years ago in which a hospital patient received serious radiation burns due to an x-ray-machine malfunction. The machine had a fancy graphical user interface, and it turned out that when you entered numbers into it rapidly enough, the machine settings were not what were displayed on the screen. This didn’t show up in QA testing because the testers followed scripts and entered numbers very slowly as a result. There was no sanity check independent of the GUI to make sure the values were reasonable either. While the x-rays were being taken the patient complained that the machine was making her feel very warm, but the staff ignored her complaints because that “couldn’t possibly happen.”
Tara
Here is the sad thing. EVEN WITH TERRORISTS FLYING IS THE SAFEST FORM OF TRAVEL!
Seriously.
I terrorist with a car could kill as many people.
As a Transwoman I can say I would not use any such machine. It is absurd, invasive, and disgusting.
Really are we so afraid? And why arnt the christianists getting up in arms? Seeing a naked woman is sin still right?
Wade MacMorrighan
LOL! I can see it, now: A whole website devoted to posting these images of neked folks! but, hey, imagine this, if it’s not to revolting: a neked image of ol’ Mags fit for mocking!!!! LOL!!!
terrwill
No. 12 · JR: still waiting for those “references……….”
FakeName
“Really are we so afraid? And why arnt the christianists getting up in arms? Seeing a naked woman is sin still right?”
Not if you don’t let it affect you. It is only a sin if you lust after the woman and desire to have intimate relations with her. The same goes for a woman lusting after a guy.
FakeName
What the hell?! I did not make the above comment! How is someone getting into my ID?
Dennis
The screeners will deserve bonus pay for being forced to look at all those fat pimply asses, saggy tits, and assorted other physical atrocities…if any group of airline passengers I’ve ever seen is any indication.
MY EYES!!! OH MY EYES!!!
terrwill
No. 26 · FakeName: Oh great, now there is a Fake FakeName!!!!
B
In No. 27, Dennis wrote, “The screeners will deserve bonus pay for being forced to look at all those fat pimply asses, saggy tits, and assorted other physical atrocities…if any group of airline passengers I’ve ever seen is any indication. MY EYES!!! OH MY EYES!!!”
Don’t worry about the pimples unless they are very large – the image won’t resolve features smaller than a wavelength, so with a 1 mm wavelength, it would have to be a pretty big pimple to stand out. The other “atrocities” are a different story.
That’s why you should worry about privacy – the people you can hire to spend their days on such a boring job are not going to have a lot of job satisfaction. Who knows what they might do to reduce the boredom?
Mike
And how are they going to stop someone with a condom full of explosives shoved up their bums or hoo-has? Are body cavity searches next?
Jake
I could care less if some TSA person sees my cock if it makes travel safer. These idiots are doing whatever they can to harm us, the only people that seem to care about this “invasive scan” are self concious idiots and nut-job far leftists concerned about the “invasion of their privacy”. If seeing an X-ray scan of my dick makes the lines go down and protects us more so be it.
B
No. 30, Mike wrote, “And how are they going to stop someone with a condom full of explosives shoved up their bums or hoo-has?”
Hopefully sexually repressive religious beliefs will do the trick,
as most of the terrorists these days seem to be religious nuts.
G
What’s the health risk if you’re a frequent traveler? I mean repeated exposure to x-rays can’t be good…
B
No. 33 · G “What’s the health risk if you’re a frequent traveler? I mean repeated exposure to x-rays can’t be good…”
They claim the exposure per scan is equivalent to the additional radiation you’d be subjected to for two minutes at altitude over what you’d get on the earth’s surface. That assumes the equipment works as advertised.
The setup they use is intended to scatter the x-rays off clothing and your skin. They are not trying to detect x-rays that pass through you. How well the x-rays scatter depends on the material the x-rays are scattering off of and the wavelength of the x-rays.
It’s pretty safe if the machines work as advertised. The critical thing is to use an anemic x-ray source that is incapable of putting out a dangerous level of radiation no matter how someone or something screws up. The people
running these things are not going to be the brightest guys on the planet.
B
In No. 31, Jake wrote, “I could care less if some TSA person sees my cock if it makes travel safer. These idiots are doing whatever they can to harm us, the only people that seem to care about this ‘invasive scan’ are self concious idiots and nut-job far leftists concerned about the ‘invasion of their privacy’. If seeing an X-ray scan of my dick makes the lines go down and protects us more so be it.”
… you might feel differently if some bored employee snaps a picture of the image and starts trading it with his friends. 🙂
But, what makes you think Osama et al. really care if they kill people or not? After 9/11, Osama put out a video where he was more or less gloating about it, but he said one thing that was very interesting – he predicted that the U.S. would react by turning into an insufferable police state as security measures are heaped on top of security measures, and all of that slows down travel and costs a bundle in decreased productivity. He didn’t expect the buildings to completely collapse (not that he minded). He probably figured there would be a demoralizing eyesore and that we’d spend over a year trying to figure out whether to try to fix it or dismantle it.
What I think they really want to do is just what Osama said – they want to get us to overreact by turning ourselves into a police state, so we can suffer from a repressive government like the ones that run various Muslim countries. With us nervous to begin with, all they have to do is to get a few hapless morons to make failed attempts at blowing up aircraft. It doesn’t matter if they fail as long as we overreact, so they can do it on a shoestring budget.
So, whatever we do, let’s not do what those guys really want us to do – make life miserable for ourselves.
master adrian
UPDATE:
The European Parliament did FORBID the use of these machines due to these privacy-problems, and THAT was the reason they were not in use when the Underwear-bomber (the one who burned more then his underwear) while trying to detonate a bomb in his underpants.
In 3 weeks from now they will be functional at Schiphol Airport (the Amsterdam Airport as most people know it), as then new SOFTWARE will be installed on the machines, that will make human checking defunt, as that software will be able to detect not only solid material but also powder etc. etc.
If then something is detected by the machine, a human (of the same gender as the “suspect”) will do a full body-search (by hand), with the approval to check genitals too!
According to the Minister of Interior Affairs (of the Netherlands) this will be the new rules and settings.
END OF UPDATE
master adrian
@ nr.30 Mike:
“And how are they going to stop someone with a condom full of explosives shoved up their bums or hoo-has? Are body cavity searches next?”
Such cavity checks are already practice at Schiphol/Amsterdam Airport, especially on the travelers from Aruba and Suriname, as travelers from these countries carry often cocaine-swallowers (in condoms).
badluckshadow13
This is old news… still pisses me off though.
I love the lady’s reasoning, “they find it quite intrusive, this technology takes that away”
Yes, because seeing under our clothes is really so much less intrusive…
Rikard
We willingly que up and zig zag back and forth through roped areas like so much dumb cattle and people are worried a body scan viewed by someone in another room will rob us of our DIGNITY? The narcissistic idea that one is is so special that one should be imune from common rules should not be confused with dignity. Just think of it as part of your audtition tape for the reality show about your life. The sense of entitlement that includes flying coast to coast for under $100 has already turned air travel into a flying WalMart. When they get to strip searches and cavity searches we will find out how bad the kids really need to see Disney World.
Zinga
I can’t believe that none of you are concerned about the exposure to such a large amount of radiation!
B
No. 40 · Zinga wrote, “I can’t believe that none of you are concerned about the exposure to such a large amount of radiation!”
Baring a malfunction or incompetence (what can happen depends on the maximum power of the x-ray source, which is unknown), the amount of radiation you would be exposed to is tiny compared to the additional amount due to flying at 30,000 feet. The millimeter-wavelength devices do not use ionizing radiation and the power levels are supposedly small compared to a cell phone. It won’t fry your brain as could happen if you put your head in a microwave oven and turned it on.
Katrin
B: No health risks?
The fact that there is no more radiation involved than in cell phones or flying at 30,000 feet does not really comfort me.
Don’t forget that cell phones do emit a lot potentially harmful waves (too bad that nobody is interested in long term studies on cell phone usage any more, since cell phones are so common and convenient).
I read some bit more disturbing info about that…
For instance, none of the producers of full body scans have agreed to certify that there are no long term risks.
And why will airline staff and frequent flyers be exempted from full body scans after a terrorism check up if they are so safe?
Pregnant women will be exempted, too, it seems (but what if you don’t have a certificate that you’re pregnant?).
I just object to any device that exposes me to more radiation than necessary – and I still don’t see why full body scans should be necessary. As most of the other anti-terrorism measures (e.g. liquid regulations) which are introduced just after a terrorism event, they are meant to give us a false feeling of security and show that the authorities actually do something – no one has ever demonstrated their effectiveness objectively.
Scared of Tyranny
What about pregnant women being scanned and scanned when they travel or sex offenders loving there job as screeners. The claims of low radiation are a blanket lies to sell more scanners. You will see a huge rise in fetal problems related to xray exposure and high mrad rates.
Joe
Hell . . . I want to be safe on a plane. They can ask me to strip right there, no scanner needed! It’s not that it turns me on, it doesn’t, but I was in theatre for years so it’s not like I haven’t been naked around people.
Point being, doesn’t matter if they see your junk, if it stops some asshole from bringing an explosive on a plane and killing innocent people for his/her warped minded views…I say DO IT!
romeo
Was just watching CNN and had to retrieve this thread. They had a report about the implementation of these scanners in the UK. Showed a very officious security staffperson asking a traveller to “turn around now and let’s see what you’ve got.” Total quote!
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA AND HA!
Stephen
Why do so many Americans worry so much about offending people. In case you don’t know, the people who are attacking and killing our men, women, and children are KILLING our men, women and children and we’re still worried about hurting their feelings by profiling. Why should our pregnant wives have to go through these machines and add even a minute amount of radiation exposure to our unborn children? These terrorists are foreigners with accents, young males, whos travels throw up many red flags. If we start making this standard procedure then the terrorists will know and will find other ways to get by security. I for one am not willing to pay for theses scanners to be put in through taxes or increased prices of plane tickets, to simply have my rights violated by treating me and my family as if we are terror suspects!
scott ny'er
@No. 9 · FakeName
that cnn link… that was terrible.
that being said, i’d rather be patted down then go thru the scanner. I don’t know if this will make it safer but I do think something needs to be done.
Phoebe K
You never know who could be a bomber. El Al (the Israeli airline) caught a pregnant Irish woman who was going to Palestine to meet her fiancee’s Parents. The fiancee had put explosives in her bags without her knowledge. Even El Al admits they do not profile. They interview everyone. They suspect everyone. They identified the shoe bomber before his attempt when he wanted to fly El Al. They finally let him fly but had an armed air marshal in the next seat.
You may think you should be immune but just because you think this doesn’t mean we should do it.
And for all the overly sensitive and modest folks – you don’t have anything any different from hundreds of others, even the trans people. You will not have any contact with the x-ray readers.
The stakes are very high and I am surprised that anyone is so opposed to these scanners when we’ve already lost so many planes and people to terrorism. I don’t want to die on a plane because of someones foolish modesty and prudishness.
venitta
wow – what an article – thanks “fakename” for the web link. that is just how the TSA personel made me feel when the machine beeped at me once – asked about my health issues and made me tell them about my surgeries and metal in by body and even then they still wanted to take me to a private room to be searched. Like i will be alone with those untrained medical persons so they can do what they want and then deny it later – i want witnesses.
Guess i won’t fly. Poor girl in the lubbock story – i hope they sue – TSA never apologized and even said the TSA person did the right thing – that was a policy or procedure left to idiots to interpet.
B
No. 42 · Katrin wrote, “B: No health risks? The fact that there is no more radiation involved than in cell phones or flying at 30,000 feet does not really comfort me.”
The fact is that the amount of radiation (assuming x-rays) is supposedly equivalent to two minutes at 30,000 feet. That’s not a credible safety risk as we are exposed to low levels of radiation all the time. What you should be worried about are machine malfunctions or misconfigurations.
“Don’t forget that cell phones do emit a lot potentially harmful waves (too bad that nobody is interested in long term studies on cell phone usage any more, since cell phones are so common and convenient).” All the large-scale studies show no medical issues. What usually happens is that someone tries a small-scale study (lots of them) in the hope of finding something to investigate further. Some will randomly show something unlikely enough to be worrisome, and for those, larger-scale studies are done. Those may show that there is not a problem, but then political activist types will report the small-scale ones and not mention that the larger-scale ones indicated that the original results were anomalous.
There’s a significant difference between the use of ionizing radiation (x-rays) and non-ionizing radiation (millimeter waves). A single high-energy photon can cause genetic damage. A single millimeter-wave photon cannot. Even with their low intensity, the backscatter x-ray machines will have a tiny risk of triggering a cancer, but the additional risk compared to just living in a world with background radition is small (unless, of course, the x-ray machine malfunctions in some way that causes it to put out a lot more radiation than intended).
I’d be more worried about failure modes than anything else as far as safety is concerned.