3 Women Say TSA Screeners Groped Vaginas During Pat-Down

[avaistheone1]

We're now aware of three separate incidents in which TSA screeners have allegedly touched travelers vaginas during the new "enhanced" pat-downs. To recap: A blogger in Dayton, Ohio says a TSA employee at a Dallas airport touched her breasts, buttocks, vagina area and "both of my labia"; an elementary schoolteacher from Washington says, "I didn’t really expect her to touch my vagina through my pants"; and today an ABC News employee claims she was subject to a "demeaning" search at Newark Liberty International Airport Sunday morning. This one's the worst:

"The woman who checked me reached her hands inside my underwear and felt her way around," the ABC employee says. "It was basically worse than going to the gynecologist. It was embarrassing. It was demeaning. It was inappropriate." In response to an inquiry from Good Morning America, TSA administrator John Pistole explained, "There should never be a situation where that happens. The security officers are there to protect the traveling public. There are specific standard operating protocols, which they are to follow." Well, it's good to know that TSA screeners aren't actually supposed to go to third base during a pat-down. But do they know that? Here are a few more horror stories:

http://gothamist.com/2010/11/22/3_women_say_tsa_screeners_groped_va.php

[katnapped]

1. According to DU posters

It either didn't really happen, is being blown way out of proportion, or they need to accept it since everything changed after 911 :sarcasm:

[WolverineDG]

7. Or that it didn't happen because the women named the wrong body part

it's not rape or groping unless you can correctly identify the body part touched. :eyes:

oh, never mind. I see one's already shown up on this thread. I suppose they might enjoy strangers running their hands all over their & their daughters' genitals, but I don't.

dg

[uppityperson]

17. Where did I say it "didn't happen" or is OK because they named the wrong part

Good grief. Does no one read the message part, just the subject line?
This TSA crap is BAD ENOUGH without having to resort to inaccuracies. Seriously, it is crap what they are doing but you don't have to exaggerate more.

I thought you had me on ignore. Huh.

[Brickbat]

30. For the record, that totally wasn't me.

:hide:

[WolverineDG]

40. No, but you were one of the first to scream about it nt

[Brickbat]

44. About the terminology? Absolutely.

About how incorrect terminology completely excuses what's actually going on? Not at all.

[pgodbold]

15. Hell, I don't think women even had vaginas till after 9/11. nt

[KansDem]

60. Some DUers (yesterday) said this is what your doctor does, so why the fuss?

Incredible...

[Matariki]

2. They've got a serious PR issue when this is happening to News Agency employees.

[avaistheone1]

4. Employees of major networks yet.

Mega PR issue and then some. Good to see when things go so horribly there are still some Americans that take notice and act.

[uppityperson]

3. You can NOT touch a vagina through pants. You CAN touch labia,but not vagina

I really wish people would get their anatomy straight. This TSA crap is BAD ENOUGH without having to resort to inaccuracies designed to inflame emotions further. Seriously, it is bad enough.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kennah]

6. It's true ...

... there is a separate room for TSA vagina groping.

[hlthe2b]

9. Touching the vulvar lips with hands inside one's panties...

Sure, they are confusing terms, but it really doesn't make a tremendous difference in terms of appropriateness of the TSA actions.

[golddigger]

10. Oh for fuck sakes!

:banghead:

[uppityperson]

14. What? You don't think this TSA crap is BAD ENOUGH without having to resort to inaccuracies

Seriously?

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[grahamhgreen]

12. Technically they are not touching anything! Except the fabric! Therefore, it's OK!

:sarcasm:

[LisaL]

13. The abc employee said the screener stuck her hands inside

the underwear.

[grahamhgreen]

28. But then they're only touching the inside of their latex gloves!

:sarcasm:

[reggie the dog]

56. well if touching through latex without consent is leagal

then raping with a condom on is legal??

[uppityperson]

16. Ah, another poster who doesn't read the message part that says...

This TSA crap is BAD ENOUGH without having to resort to inaccuracies! Or are you one who approves of them?

Not sure who is saying it is OK, not me.

[Blue_In_AK]

45. I'm rather ticklish in that area, even through my clothes.

I'm afraid if someone tried this with me, I'd knee them in the chin. Involuntarily, of course.

[quinnox]

18. I understand your point but since vagina is used

so commonly in general every day use to refer to that area overall, its kind of silly IMHO to expect people to use language that precise.

[uppityperson]

19. Rather like using the c word, or the n word. Because they are used so commonly to refer

to women or people of color, hey, it's kind of silly to use language that precise.

Saying "it's commonly used" so you can continue to use something improperly doesn't seem like a good thing. Sorry if I am trying to educate people. Continue on.

[LaurenG]

20. Oh good grief.

You aren't educating anyone, we already know what was meant.

Why not just let it go

[uppityperson]

21. well bless your little heart

[quinnox]

22. well, I think its admirable

And you do live up to your handle. I do like you but maybe your expectations are too high sometimes.

[uppityperson]

23. I was going to uppityb* but decided not to since wanted, at first, to have gender not matter

and then because the term is not generally allowed on DU.

Thanks. Sometimes I am and sometimes I do. Seems there is plenty enough to be outraged about anyways without exaggerating. Thanks for not calling me names and assuming things about me. Appreciate it.

Yes, I'm pragmatic. And uppity.

[Dreamer Tatum]

25. Yeah, OK. Just imagine someone from from the McCain/Palin admin saying the following:

"Well, let's be clear: no vaginas were touched at all. Next question."

Please. Give me a break.

[Brickbat]

29. Thanks for taking the fall on this one, uppityperson! You beat me to it! I was in here as soon as

I saw the thread.

The assertion upthread that insisting on correct terminology and encouraging bodily awareness = denying "it" ever happened or supporting invasive TSA "security" techniques CRACKS MY SHIT UP.

And with that, I'm just going to sit over here with my BFF, "Hide Thread." Uppityperson, I salute you! :patriot:

[Bonobo]

32. WTF is the significant difference in your mind?

Damn, your post pisses me off.

Do you think my daughter would feel happier that it was just her labia and not her vagina?

In the vernacular, the whole area is regarded as 'vagina', so stop being an ass -oh I'm sorry a "buttocks"!

[uppityperson]

33. I don't think your daughter, or much of anyone, would feel better.

And calling the "whole area" a vagina is asinine. Especially if you know better.

Did you read the message or just the subject line? You seemed to have missed where I have written, over and over and over, that WHAT THE TSA IS DOING IS WRONG. You don't have to exaggerate to make that point. Call it wrong, I do. But no, the whole ares is NOT regarded as "vagina" any more than women are regarded as "b*s".

Seriously bonobo, as one of my favorite simians, WHY say "omg he touched my vagina" when "omg he groped my crotch, ran his hands over my vulva" is JUST as effective and doesn't make what you are complaining about look like an exaggeration of an ignorant person. If you want to be taken seriously, you DON'T NEED TO EXAGGERATE.

[Bonobo]

36. Look, the bottom line is that 'vagina' is the most commonly used term

to describe a woman's private parts.

I am confident that no one, in the course of normal conversation, uses the term vulva or labia -akin to referring to a man's 'frenulum' instead of just saying "penis".

"Vagina", used in this way, is a broad description of a woman's genital area and is not asinine.

What IS asinine is that you are making a big deal about this terminology disagreement.

I don't think the term was used to exaggerate. It was used because it is the only commonly used term used in conversation.

[uppityperson]

39. Not common amongst anyone I know and might as well use the correct term

It is also asinine to continue to defend the use of this. Tata

I just checked with a young adult and they agreed, the vagina is the inside tube between uterus and outside the body. Learn and use it properly.

[TorchTheWitch]

46. I guess it's better to call it "junk"?

Somehow I don't recall all this technical accuracy being necessary when referring to the various parts of a man's genitals. I look forward to your posts about terminology accuracy about whether or not a man's balls or ball SACK was touched... seeing as it seems so terribly important to make distinctions.

How dare all these men complain that their balls are being touched when it's technically impossible seeing that they're inside the ball sack and can't be touched without surgical intervention. This terrible exaggeration needs to be pointed out or no one will take them seriously... right?

Come now... do you really think that the average guy know what the fuck a "vulva" is??? Hell, the average guy has enough trouble locating the clitoris and may not even know what you're talking about unless you call it a "clit". And let's not stop at guys... I'm willing to bet that there's plenty of women that aren't altogether certain exactly what bits are their own vulva.

Now, can we finally stop highjacking the thread with all this ridiculous accuracy in terminology?

[uppityperson]

47. Since it seems you don't know what a scrotum is, I doubt you know what a vulva is either

[TorchTheWitch]

48. I know what both are, thank you

However, I think I made it apparent that your accurrate terminology complaints about this is completely absurd seeing as you don't have any problem with the word "junk" nor seem to believe that anyone, including your own self, are confused about what body parts are being referred to by that inaccurate term.

Face it, no one, INCLUDING YOUR OWN SELF, has any difficulty in figuring out what body parts the women complaining of being touched were talking about regardless of terminology. You're making a big deal over something totally irrelevant to the issue and have only succeeded in highjacking the thread while showing yourself to be unconcerned about terminology use in reference to all the other inaccurate terms being used all over GD concerning this issue as you haven't made any similar complaints about these other inaccurate terms.

Just so you know, in examining labeled anatomy charts of both men and women I have not yet encountered any body parts termed "junk", "bits", "privates", "balls", "dick", "ass", "butt", "private parts", "personal area", "boobs", "tits", etc. Seeing as we all already know that none of these inaccurate terms need to be translated for you or anyone else, can we now get back to discussing the actual issue instead of this strawman issue you also already know is not confusing to anyone, INCLUDING YOUR OWN SELF?

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. I am sorry, you KNOW as a medical Professional

that you did this, you'd be in trouble... even if the name of the part is wrong.

[enuegii]

38. You can not "touch labia"...

through pants, unless said pants were unzipped/unbuttoned and therefore allowing free access to the anatomical area in question.

If you want to be a stickler for accuracy...

It's still groping, though.

[readmoreoften]

50. Yes, you can touch labia through pants. You can also enter a vagina through loose pants.

What's unbelievable is that we're having this conversation in terms of airport security.

[TorchTheWitch]

53. anyone that owns a vagina knows this

I'm surprised it seems so confusing for some people. You'd think it would be obvious that a woman wearing loose pants especially of a loose fabric can still have her vagina penetrated.

[readmoreoften]

54. But if you're REALLY trying to change the subject from human rights violations

to human anatomy, well, apparently it's not a bad red herring.

[csziggy]

41. It was not through the pants - the TSA person put her hand inside the underpants

"The woman who checked me reached her hands inside my underwear and felt her way around," the ABC employee says.

Touching the vagina might be possible but it would have to be a deliberate act on the part of the TSA agent.

[Toucano]

42. I appreciate your call to be precise.

Even if we're in the minority on DU, WORDS HAVE MEANINGS.

The "common usage" defense is the weakest of all.

"Vagina" does not mean, "the general area between the legs of a female mammal". There's no reason to be vague when we have precise words available to us.


We criticize the tea party all the time for spelling errors, and this is just as bad.

[TorchTheWitch]

55. I can't find "junk" or "balls" on the anatomy chart

How is it that we aren't having this terminology accuracy problem with any of the other inaccurate terms being used?

For heaven's sake, everyone knows what's meant by all of these inaccurate terms, including the ones hear complaining about the "vagina" term. Everyone knows that when people loosely use the term "vagina" they may be talking about the actual medically termed body part or the general area. Nobody is going to believe that if the term "pussy" was used it was the passenger's cat being referred to.

[readmoreoften]

49. Yeah, unless your pants are tight, you can touch a vagina through pants.

But it would be hard to have it happen by accident. Sorry, labia is bad enough. And I don't think it's the names for people's anatomy and their lack of proper education on their bodies that should outrage you.

[grahamhgreen]

8. Every perv in the country will be flocking to the TSA.

[flpab]

24. 99% is BS

I work at an airport and we have heard pax all day worry about security and then they are getting on the plane and saying that was so easy, what was the press talking about? It is so crazy this time of the year that there are not enough skycaps to help with all the wheelchairs so agents have to help. Have never seen anything out of line and only super helpful TSA people. They get all these once a year flyers and many old people that really should not even be on a plane but take it in stride. John Mica has been on the news constantly asking airports to op out but private security still must follow every rule TSA lays out and what many don't know is that Mica had over 80,000 in campaign donations from these private firms and his wife has ownership in one. Real ethical Mica! He is a crook. Got his daughter off on a dui this year by saying the cop stopped her a block from his jurisdiction. She was way over the limit. I am from his district. I agree and so do most TSA officers that the Pistole pat down is over the line.

[customerserviceguy]

34. They probably already have

The ability to treat honest, decent Americans like absolute shit just for commiting the suspicious activity of travelling is something even the most pig-headed cops don't have.

By the way, is the screening for TSA employees even half as rigorous as the screening for day care workers in this country? And they don't get to feel up little children's private parts.

[WinkyDink]

26. Can we PLEASE not have an ANATOMY lesson, FGS?? IT'S THE VERNACULAR, PEDANTS.

[readmoreoften]

51. +1. He didn't touch my 3 year old's penis it was his FORESKIN.

And it's impossible to really "touch" a foreskin through underwear. God, LANGUAGE PEOPLE!

[Gormy Cuss]

59. Yes, it is the vernacular

and it doesn't make it any better to use more precise language like vulva or labia.

[Imagevision]

27. The Bilderberg Group must be rolling on the floor with laughter...yes indeed!

[krabigirl]

58. +1

[Rex]

31. Class. Action. Lawsuit.

Ya want change...ya have to work fer it in court. That is all govt bozos understand.

[name not needed]

37. Clearly they're just mad about the possibility of the TSA being unionized.

[likesmountains 52]

43. Ok, is there a difference between a rectal exam and a butt pat down?

Maybe this is an example of Anatomy Nazis, akin to grammar nazis but the truth is that the vagina is an internal organ, just like the rectum. Feeling around your butt is not the same as inserting a finger in to your rectum. And as uncomfortable and icky as it is...patting your pubis is not the same as examining your vagina.

[readmoreoften]

52. It's a lot more difficult to get inside asscheeks than labia. Are you people for real?

Is this really where you want to go? No you cannot rub inside a woman's vagina through her underwear unless you're really putting some elbow grease into it. Yes you can absolutely slip in between her labia through her pants and definitely though her underpants. And you can definitely bump her clitoris.

I've got a NEWSFLASH for ya. Bumping into a clitoris or poking up into labia is really no less invasive than entering a vagina when all is said and done. And, once again...

ARE WE REALLY HAVING THIS CONVERSATION?

[somone]

57. Will somebody draw a picture of all that

for people who missed sex ed in high school...

The next paper selected for me was by Adrian and Bronk. They demonstrated that nerve impulses were sharp, single-pulse phenomena. They had done experiments with cats in which they had measured voltages on nerves. I began to read the paper. It kept talking about extensors and flexors, the gastrocnemius muscle, and so on. This and that muscle were named, but I hadn't the foggiest idea of where they were located in relation to the nerves or to the cat. So I went to the librarian in the biology section and asked her if she could find me a map of the cat. "A map of the cat, sir?" she asked, horrified. "You mean a zoological chart!"
- Richard Feynman