How do you feel about being seen naked in airports?

[sparks19]

if it beeped tell them it's your chastity belt

 

[Renee750il]

Yah but you agree to the former and the latter can't be done without just cause/warrant. Or well, it's not supposed to be done.

And also it could be argued that if you want to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time, you kind of DO have to go on a plane. Some people's livelihood depends on it. I mean you don't HAVE to drive either, but it's kind of necessary for the majority of people.



Anyhow:
"Love those gigantic tits" remark lands airport scanner operator in hot water | Gadling.com

Didn't take long at all.

And let the sexual harassment lawsuits begin . . .

 

[Juicy]

Imagine the shadow showing up on the xray screen then someone saying "Nice piercing down there" :yikes:

I did let a basically total stranger pierce me, would not phase me at all. I would just keep it moving and say hmm yeah it is, thanks. Now I would probably get kicked out because of my boyfriend however, had he heard that remark.

LOL @ sparks I soo should haha.

 

[MPP]

Anybody outside my doctor gonna see me nekkid, I expect 'em to pay for the privilege. Though I can't imagine why they'd want to, at this stage of my life. No accounting for taste, though.

I wouldn't mind for myself. But kids? Nonononono. NOT kids. NO.

 

[Doberluv]

Anybody outside my doctor gonna see me nekkid, I expect 'em to pay for the privilege. Though I can't imagine why they'd want to, at this stage of my life. No accounting for taste, though.

I wouldn't mind for myself. But kids? Nonononono. NOT kids. NO.

:rofl1::rofl1::headbanger:

 

[Doberluv]

Originally Posted by GlassOnion
Yah but you agree to the former and the latter can't be done without just cause/warrant

Are you sure that would apply? After all, they're not forcing you to go on the plane. That's your choice, so that rule may not stand. Plus, it's not law enforcement, right? Or is it in some form?

 

[Doberluv]

Article was removed after a link was posted to the comments on a CNN article - Google cache:

Airport Whole Body Scanners Likened to ?Virtual Strip Search?


Suit yourselves. If you miscarry your babies or they end up defective, or you get cancer, it won't bother the tin-foil hat people in the slow line a bit.

Oh, wait, we have socialized medicine now so we all pay for the fast line, non-paranoid people's medical bills plus pay for the scanners. Still, worse for you than the people in the slow lines.

Touche`. :hail:

I knew that was significant enough amounts of Roetgens because I use to take x-rays and to see through an entire torso, all that fat and muscle (thickness & density) takes plenty of radiation. The only time it is lower is when it's like a finger or some smaller body part. But we're talking the whole body; torso, thighs, arms, head. No thanks! Plus, there are secondary rays bouncing off the walls in an entire area that can affect people who are not even getting x-rayed. It could affect pace makers, unless they make provisions of lead walls and completely close off the area where this machine is.

 

[Lilavati]

You know, every time I read the title to this thread, I think "I've had a nightmare like that."

 

[babymomma]

Wait, do they force you to get scanned like this now? :yikes:

Can't say I would be comfortable with it. I dont care heavily they check up on the ppl working there, i dont want anybody getting jollies out of seeing naked images of myself, other ppl or children. And I backround check is useless if the person working is a creep that hasnt been caught or charged with anything. It would make me feel WAY too freaked out to know that the person seeing the pictures are getting something out of it. I know its unlikely they would. But you really never know.

Plus I just would rather not have somebody see me naked.

 

[Boemy]

Wow, I was disturbed by this concept BEFORE it turned out the scanners can see you nude. This is going to be abused . . . duh.

Does it show your actual skin? I'ma gonna write "DEAR TSA, F--- OFF!" on my stomach in Magic Marker the next time I fly the not-so-friendly skies.

 

[LittleBigDog]

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/ne/pdfs/SC_1_12_Rep_x_ray_SecurityScreening1.pdf
Presidential Report on Radiation
Protection Advice: Screening of Humans for
Security Purposes Using Ionizing Radiation
Scanning Systems

A.2.3 Radiation Sensitive Subgroups
There are several groups of individuals who are significantly more sensitive than
average, and these may need special consideration:
• Infants and children;
• Individuals with genetically based hypersensitivity to ionizing radiation;
• The developing embryo or fetus of a pregnant woman.
The risk for radiation-induced cancer increases with decreasing age at time of
exposure (ICRP, 1991). Very roughly, a neonate is about three times more sensitive than a 25 year old adult.
There is reasonable evidence that three to five percent of the population is
significantly more sensitive to ionizing radiation than average (e.g., Schultheiss et al., 1995), and it has long been speculated that this hypersensitivity is genetically based.
It is important to note that there is not as yet direct evidence for human subgroups that have increased susceptibility to radiation-induced cancer, although there is suggestive evidence from oncogenic transformation studies of ATM heterozygote mouse embryos (Smilenov et al., 2001). However, it is too early in the scientific research on this hypersensitivity to be able to take into account the significance of radiosensitive subgroups (ICRP, 1998), and risk estimates for the general population might currently be sufficiently stringent to protect these subgroups.
The developing embryo and fetus are especially sensitive to ionizing radiation.
Risk estimates for congenital malformations and functional impairment after in utero exposure are typically an order of magnitude higher than those for radiation-induced cancer. It may well be that deterministic endpoints such as congenital malformations have a threshold in dose, below which the risk is zero. Visual inspection of the data often suggests that a threshold may exist, but little statistical support is available, except in the case of mental retardation (Otake and Schull, 1998).

 

[Doberluv]

Boemy;1580308]Wow, I was disturbed by this concept BEFORE it turned out the scanners can see you nude. This is going to be abused . . . duh.

Does it show your actual skin? I'ma gonna write "DEAR TSA, F--- OFF!" on my stomach in Magic Marker the next time I fly the not-so-friendly skies.

:rofl1::rofl1::rofl1:

Hahaha. Unfortunately, magic marker won't show up on an x-ray, but you could glue those little metal studs that are sold like stickers onto your skin and write out those "friendly" words before you fly the friendly, terrorist ridden skies.

This is going to be abused . . . duh.

Yup....of course it is. Duh. I agree 100%.

 

[release the hounds]

just fyi, the radiation doesn't bound off anything. It travels in straight lines till it's absorbed. There is some scatter from biologic tissues, but those will be lower levels of radiation and most likely at a low enough level they'd be absorbed by the person that is being scanned anyway.

 

[Doberluv]

It bounces but yes, it goes in straight lines. When I worked in a clinic, the doctor I worked for thought it best that I not work there while I was pregnant, even if my duties in the x-ray department could be dropped for the time being. I had other duties for which I was trained besides x-ray. He told me that there are secondary rays throughout the office and it may put my baby at risk. I tend to trust my doctor as well as the senior radiologist at the Virginia Mason Clinic in Seattle, who was my brother in law over someone I don't know on the Internet. Regardless, I think it's deplorable that they want to x-ray citizens or anyone where they have no probable cause...even if that law doesn't apply. It's just not right on so many levels. IMO, of course.

 

[babymomma]

Anyone else notice that the scanner's images look nothing like the pose the woman is standing in?

Im just wondering why they felt the need to use a different image?

I mean, I may jhust be paranoid but, what do they have to hide?

 

[Bunny82]

I am sorry if this was mentioned I only skimmed but is everyone being scanned? Children too? THAT is my biggest concern.

Honestly I don't mind if someone sees me naked...However as a mother it does concern me about them violating children in such a manner.

 

[Kristen1980]

I don't care. As long as it prevents my plane from blowing up in mid air I could care less.

 

[babymomma]

I don't care. As long as it prevents my plane from blowing up in mid air I could care less.

ahh, but where theres a will, theres a way.

How long until terrorists figure something else out? .. IMO its just a matter of time.

 

[Kristen1980]

Very true. Where there's a will there's a way.

 

[MPP]

Just happened to think. What about people whose religion or cultural background require body modesty? I mean, most nuns (those that are left, anyway) don't wear actual habits any more, the way they used to, but they do wear very modest clothing. How would they feel about appearing naked in these circumstances? We have a small Muslim community in this area--and no, they don't come equipped with horns and tails or strap-on bombs. These women don't wear face coverings, but they do cover their hair and wear long skirts. I doubt they'd take kindly to having outsiders see them naked. Now that I think of it, there's a small Hassidic community a couple of miles thataway, and their women dress pretty much the same. :lol-sign: I don't know if they're likely to travel by plane, but I doubt they'd take this kindly.

Some of the Hispanic women I know would probably take a deep breath and go for it, but their menfolk would have an absolute MELTDOWN!

This is not a good idea. Too many cans of worms just lined up waiting to be opened.