What's the difference between designer vaginas and female genital mutilation?

Both are mutilations of women's bodies so that the conform to the social norms about sexuality. In one case, it's to repress sexuality, and in the other, it's to convince women that they'd have more and better sex if they mutilate themselves.

I suspect that many people in the west feel superior to countries which perform female circumcision (which is, indeed, and awful thing). But, how could we be culturally superior if our culture is trying to convince women that they need to have surgery to fix their vaginas?

anaesthesia



oh. and the fees

something that might be impaired in a designer vagina but which is totally lost to the woman when she is mutilated by FGM.

I read a disturbing article once about voluntary clitoridectomy as part of BDSM.

There is a very clear sharp line between "to each his/her own" and child mutilation.

And you have to wonder how many women would consent to getting a designer vagina if the cultural pressures weren't so powerful.

In one case consent is cultivated by your parents and your religion. In the other, it's cultivated by the careful placement in magazines and TV of stories by corporations who stand to profit from women's choices.

Is there much difference?

If anything, it just says that in the west corporations have replaced the family/church as the source of forming public opinion, which I think most of us already realize.

one is still left with healthy functioning genetalia, and capable of having a normal full sex life. the other is not.

FGM is done by force - physical force.

Cosmetic surgeries are done, technically, by choice - though I would argue that that choice is colored by social norms/expectations stemming from patriarchy, so there's still something f*ed up going on there.

Both are taking a knife to a women's body. And I think a lot of women accept FGM the same way men in the west accept circumcision.

bother.

Second of all, I don't approve of either practice (cosmetic surgery or FGM) but one is not the other.

grow up in societies in which the cultural pressures are so overwhelming to accept it that mothers grow up not to run off with their daughters to save them from having it done to them.

What do you mean by "fix their vaginas?"

:shrug:

.. I think it tightens it up. I know the Porn Actress jenna jameson had one.

That's new to me.

...you might conclude that that yes, these are entirely "redesigned" vaginas. The big difference to me, though, aside from free will, is that the woman maintains the part of her sexual organ that allows her to fully experience sexual pleasure.

:)

...but I get ya. ;)

:shrug:

then what is the difference?

And think about what the sources of the consent is?

In one case it is the church and the family. In the other it's carefully placed stories in dozens of women's magazines and on TV shows. The only thing that says is that corporate advertizing has replaced the church and the family in the west as the way people are convinced to perceive the world and think about themselves.

It's really not that much different.

Are you avoiding my questions?

What "carefully placed stories in dozens of women's magazines and on TV shows" force women to have surgery on their vaginas???

over the last year which are overwhelmingly positive.

It's the salesman's FUD tactic applied to women's anxieties about sexual performance and their ability to satisfy men and it's convincing woment to accept something that, to me, is in many ways similar to FGM (except that it has the reverse message about sexuality -- that you're bad if you're not having good sex, rather than you're good if you don't have sex at all).

I am very interested to hear more from you about this.

I accept the fact that many people don't read and watch what I watch.

I think there are enough people here who know what I'm talking about so that I don't have to take the time to give the backstory to the couple who have not ...

"I don't have to take the time to give the backstory" - No, you must, if you wish to have your assertions taken seriously.

Otherwise it may appear this was entirely fabricated.

Please provide links to what you read and watch.

rack of the bookstore and google? Or go watch some episodes of Dr. 90210 on E!

Try this I found in secondes with google. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070524230339.aha5xr5x&show_article=1

Some here are pains with all their demands for links and proof and demading of other posters who are correct. IMHO those of you who demand such are too lazy to do your own Googling!

1932 is correct. Heck I don't even read women's mags but just from walking around in society I'm aware of this procedure and how young women are going in for this surgery from pop culture.

Young women are having this surgery because of "pop culture?" I read and "walk around in society" too, and this doesn't seem like a common concern to me.

It would just be interesting to know where it's commonly raised and propagated as a societal pressure, that's all. :shrug:

googling, and watching Dr. 90210 as "research". I just get ticked at those who demand links like we're talking about something that is obscure and not well-known if one is only peripherally paying attention to pop culture and are too lazy to call up Google themselves and type in a term. It's like never hearing the name Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan - I don't even care about them but I can't help knowing they are somehow part of our current "pop culture".

If someone here references something in a discussion I'm not aware of I don't demand links - I just run out to google and 99% of the time I find the links I need to read.

I Google a lot myself too, but I prefer JSTOR and Nexus-Lexus, etc.

Nevertheless, I am well within my right to ask for references, nor is it even a rude thing to request.

I often make assertions without backing them up, like "George W. Bushler is a cannibal baby-eater." And I also have no problem admitting I have no links for those types of assertions.... even if I am totally convinced my assertion is true. ;)

and are very happy with the results. They are college educated women who are medical professionals.
Hardly ones that were hoodwinked into this surgery.

to do the research. I am not at all convinced it is a "designer vagina craze." I have studied cultural anthropology and sociology for years, so I am very skeptical of non-peer reviewed magazines as valid references... on the other hand, I do consider popular magazines to be 'data.' ;)

From the article:

(snip)

"The fashion is being driven by commercial and media pressures that exploit women's insecurities and is fraught with unknowns, including a risk to sexual arousal, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) says.

Known as elective genitoplasty, the surgery usually entails shortening or changing the shape of the outer lips, or labia, but may also include reduction in the hood of skin covering the clitoris or shortening the vagina itself.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the practice is spreading fast in the United States as well as in Britain, but the picture is unclear, the BMJ says.

Not only is there a disturbing lack of data about the phenomenon, there has been negligible assessment about surgical after-effects -- and almost zero reflexion as to whether a labial "problem" exists in the first place, the BMJ says angrily.

In 2004-5, 800 "labial reductions" were conducted by Britain's state-run National Health Service (NHS), more than a doubling of the figure of six years earlier. Other operations were carried out by the private sector, although the full figures are unknown."

(snip)

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070524230339.aha5xr5x&show_article=1

How does this support the OP's assertion that there exists a "cultural pressure forcing people" to have surgery on their vaginas? There were only 800 procedures according this one article, which by the way does not constitute a "societal norm."

Furthermore, it states that, "The BMJ piece suggests genitoplasty is a classic example of where commercial, media and social pressures artificially create a problem, fuel concern over it and then put forward a solution for it." It only SUGGESTS it as an example of a wider phenomenon that was not clearly defined in this short piece.

The only statement in this article of which I am confident is this: "there {is} a disturbing lack of data about the phenomenon."

to having a twat tweaked?
Please. I know several women who have had them and they say that their sex life is amazing.
To each her own. They all did it willingly and paid handsomely for it and are now enjoying
it to the fullest extent.
Now tell me again where genital mutilation offers the same?

One is designer, done for the patient for their own reasons (I can't imagine but then that is me) and the other is mutilation, destroying something and causing harm and usually, most likely most of the time without consent.

a publicist convinced a magazine to write about?

It does not matter why it is out there or who put it out there if a woman wants it done it is her choice, nobody is forcing her. Yes societal pressures may be strong but it is still informed consent. Besides, there are medical reasons this procedure was designed for in the first place and those women use it for that reason just like breast reduction or augmentation after a mastectomy. Now augmentation is big business but no matter what the pressure may be it is still a procedure done with informed consent.

I would wager that genital mutilation is not any of those things. What is your point? They are not equal in any way. I am not even going to get into who makes this shit happen in the first place. You want to blame corporations then fine but I think there is much more to it than that.

Some women have very large labia that become chaffed and painful when wearing certain clothes or doing such things as riding a bike.

I guess if you are saying that women (or men, for that matter) beautify themselves based on what current society believes is beautiful then you should also be arguing against shaved underarms, shaved legs, plucked eyebrows, deoderant......oh heck, you get the picture. Some women believe this makes them more beautiful. If that helps them emotionally, I have no problems with "designer vaginas".

Female genital mutilation is a completely different and horrible case.

that ripped badly when she delivered a nearly 11 pound baby.

Not so much pressured by societal forces as much as the fact that the situation left her in not real good shape and created certain hygienic problems. When one opening is shredded nearly into another, repair is not such a bad thing.

Wouldn't it be great if feminists worked on that?

What the heck is a designer vagina? I have never seen those two words next to each other.

:scared:

Me, too! I'm not *that* old... am I?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070524230339.aha5xr5x&show_article=1

http://www.channel4.com/health/microsites/0-9/4health/body/sur_designer.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labiaplasty

:scared:

:scared:

You know, that disgusting Michael Musto and the normally-wonderful Keith Olbermann made some really lewd jokes about Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct 2, having to do with her age and genitalia (along the lines of -- "oh no, don't open your legs again at your age, gross! Ewww!"). I actually posted in the feminist's forum asking whether genitals change a lot with age. It's just not something I ever thought about. :shrug:

(On edit: as I recall, nobody else had thought much about it either, but all found the jokes disgusting.)

...Ben Franklin when he said "All cats are gray in the dark".

:thumbsup:

Perish the thought that a woman not have the body, including the genitals, of a 20-year-old for the entirety of her life. After all, a man does. :sarcasm:

It saddens me the way women (and even some men) will subject themselves to such painful and even dangerous procedures just to appease others.

As in, "Do you have B.O." and "Do you have unsightly cuticles" etc., the question causes concern. "Do you have protruding labia?" Now I actually feel like checking to see. :crazy:

web cams are for.

:spray:


Pervert.

and hear Chris Hansen reading my internet messages.:blush:

:rofl:

Egads, enough already!

Like so many women's magazines do, geared toward promoting their advertisers. Read one of those and the next thing you know, you're checking out all sorts of things. It could easily be a full-time job keeping up with all of it, 'cause it covers every square inch of a woman's body.

The elasticity is less due mostly to hormonal factors. Also dryness can cause it's own set of problems.
There is also atrophy as you get older.

Ewee...you might say...but male genitalia ALSO changes with age and it's not for the better either.:D

and I haven't heard that "designer vagina" sugery is out of control or anything. What have I missed?

I understand a tightening after a difficult birth, but is a "designer vagina" to enhance the pleasure for a woman or the appearance for a man? I'd be for the former, but I'd much prefer educating your partner as to your pleasure centres. And in my experience, men are VERY willing students!

As for FGM that is done to keep control over women, the ultimate denial of female sexuality in order to insure that they're slaves to men. Men don't even have to acknowledge female sexuality if a woman can't reach orgasm.

I dunno, sounds like a faulty analogy to me.

is another way to control them?

You know the salesman's mantra? FUD -- Feary, Urgency, Disaster. If you can convince someone that the situation is FUD, you can make them spend money even when it's not in their best interest to spend money.

Some of us may very well choose this but I resent the fact that you think we are all too stupid to figure this out. Gimme a break son.

You clearly think people are infants, who cannot be trusted with their own brains, bodies, and life choices, certainly not when confronted by the big, bad demons of advertising.

Not "in their best interest to spend money"? Who, precisely, is supposed to be IN CHARGE of determining what constitutes an individual adult's "best interest" in how to spend their own money? You?

labia revisions, outside not the inside??

Or you would get the "consent" part right off.
Lee

I believe the consent is manufactured by the media. Who cared about this issue until women were made anxious by the media about it.

Repressing sexuality in countries that have FUD is done much the same way. Consent (or at least, acceptance after the fact) is achieved by cultural pressures.

Hyper-sexuality and an anxiety that you're going to bad at sex and unhappy if your vagina isn't like it was when you were 16 is used to make women consent to a surgery that really is the other side of the same coin that FGM is on.

Comparing a women being pressured by advertising to a baby girl being mutilated...not even comparable.
Lee

I have never heard of this. Where did you read this or see this on TV?

What "cultural pressures?"

Check out the women's magazines from the last year or so. Watch TV. It's out there. And it's obvious that there are well-paid publicists behind it.

I read all day and night, and watch as much TV as I can, and have never in all my decades heard of 'forced vaginal surgery' to conform to a social norm that does not exist. Nor have I ever read anything about it in the hundreds of academic journals I read every year, every week, and every day.

Please provide proof of this 'social norm.' I ask this as a cultural anthropologist, and am genuinely interested.

I'm a woman. I'm 53. I've known THOUSANDS of women. ..and I've only known one, in my very long life, who ever had an operation to tighten her vaginal muscles and it was for HER pleasure. One, out of 1000s of women.

Lee

about how women (and men) are coerced into believing false images of themselves by the corporate media.

Thank you. :hi:

I agree. :hi: It harms the debate. It is probably the stupidest fake analogy I have EVER seen.
Lee

of any notion of adult consent whatsoever.

That's a fucking ridiculous argument. Yes, anyone who does anything you, personally, don't approve of, has been hyp-mo-tized by the media and some evil industry and is suddenly a zombie with no cognitive function. You realize, of course, that the anti-choice nutjobs use the same fucked-up logic to deny women the right to control their own bodies? They get around the clear fact that they want to control other people by arguing that the "abortion industry" has "brainwashed" and "victimized" these poor women into believing they want to end their pregnancies. There's no choice, you see, because the poor dears just don't know what they're doing. :eyes:

It's a fucking crock. Either there is a difference between forcing someone- usually a minor- to do something, and adults making their own decisions (even decisions that you may not agree with) or there isn't. If there isn't, then there's absolutely no reason we shouldn't have one state or church appointed arbiter running EVERY aspect of our lives, since obviously none of us is capable of making ANY decision for ourselves, ever.

Cultural perceptions created by tradition, the church, families.

In countries where women think they need a designer vagina, what drives the perception?

Probably the placement of an article by a well-paid publicist in Vogue.

If that weren't a fact, there wouldn't be a billion dollar advertising industry in this country.

In the other, you're talking about a consenting adult making a decision for him or her-self.

Keep taking your logic to its extreme, and what personal choices in this society WOULD you consider permissible? None?

for convincing people to make choices that don't really help them do anything but spend money on a product.

You mean there are articles and commercials saying that the end of the world is coming if woman do not get a DV? Please you cheapen the real disaster of FGM with YOUR FUD.

for a baseline philosophical starting point: What a consenting adult wants to do in his or her own life, with his or her own body, insofar as he or she isn't harming anyone else or interfering with their freedom, is his or her own business.

The mothers do it because they feel if they don't they will be sentencing their daughters to an unmarried life which often means a life living off her family or being a poor paraih in the community or both. These are cultures where they rarely marriage for love. It is economic and the males have a disgusting need to ensure their purchase is "pure".

To try and equate a woman getting cosmetic surgery by choice to a little girl having her private parts cut out (sometimes with a piece of glass)and then having her vagina sewn shut is truly offensive.

Just to spite him...:D

The designer vagina thing is made up, trend article BS. I don't believe for a minute that masses of women are lining up to have their girl parts re-done. It's just another sensationalist ploy to sell newspapers and magazines.

But I sure as hell know I dont want anyone to nip my bud!

Not that meaningless, unquantifiable claptrap you added on the end, which essentially translates to: "People should be free to do what *I* want with their own bodies"

People can do what they want with their own bodies. But it's distressing when choices are built on lies or made in a context built on fear-urgencey-disaster.

Jack- my dad died of lung cancer. Believe me, I know all about it.

I also have alcoholism spread all over my family tree like a bad set of Christmas lights. I'm well aware of the detrimental, self destructive and even addictive choices people can make.

But guess what? When all is said and done, I still believe that consenting adults NEED the freedom to be able to make their own choices. About their own bodies. I don't think cigarettes should be illegal, despite the damage I've seen them do. I don't think booze should be illegal, despite the damage I've seen it do. I also think our drug laws are a fucking joke. What we need in this society is NOT more micro-managers telling people what they can and cannot do with their own bodies, we need fewer. This logic of "it's for your own good" is how we get laws keeping the terminally ill from choosing a dignified, pain free exit on their own terms. Is why we have pain patients who can't get adequate palliative care, because their doctors are terrified of the DEA.

It's "distressing"? Okay, be distressed. Distress is the price you pay for the recognition that in a free society, some folks may make choices that you don't agree with. People get nose jobs, presumably because a corporate-sponsored ideal of beauty has convinced them that they need a new nose. People get piercings or tattoos because corporate-driven "countercultural" demographic trend-pushers have convinced them that they're "cool". People buy and wear clothes, because some corporation has convinced them that streaking is very 1974.. And so on, and so on. But the point of your op wasn't to express "distress" with cosmetic vagina modification (something I'd never heard of until you brought it up) the point was to draw a moral equivalence between it and a horrible cultural practice that is done non-consensually--- to children.

when the first child is birthed?

Otherwise, everything else is normal.

I guess I've been out of the loop.
I'm interested. I , well, I am a big fan of vaginas.
What does a custom vagina entail?
Cup-holders?
Built in Stereo Surround Sound?
Do these new fangled vaginas have a lightning fast internet connection?

Hey, I might go for that! Is the headphone jack for my IPod then gonna be located in my belly button???

Seriously, I don't see "designer vaginas" as being a huge problem in our society. I see educating women to embrace and celebrate their own sexuality as being a huge solution to a lot of REAL problems. But unfortunately, man insecure, powerful men are deathly afraid of that. Too bad, most guys love sex with a confident woman who knows what pleases her!

The demand will surely outweigh the supply during the first week of its debut. :D

:rofl: :rofl:

Lee

... an iPhone, an iPod... a DUzy? :bounce:

:rofl:

http://www.ohmibod.com/ohmibod.html

OhMiBod is a sleek, sophisticated new generation of vibrator that combines elegance of design with the excitement of your favorite music. The audio enabled integrated microchip allows the OhMiBod to vibrate to the beat and rhythm of your music while you listen. Measures 5 1/2" long (insertable) and 1 1/8" in diameter. OhMiBod comes with an additional multi-speed endcap for use without an iPod or music player. It really is 2 products in one! Our motor provides strong yet quiet, intense rhythmic vibrations. With polished chrome detail and pearl white body this product is the ultimate iPod acsexsory!

at any time, if the designer vagina seeker has any doubt about what she is doing, she can tell the surgeon that she has changed her mind and cancel the surgery

genital mutilation is not a choice, it is something done to the woman quite young, often even at puberty or before, so that she is not old enough to give informed consent, because she has no idea what her sexuality will mean to her

both are done to make the woman more marketable to men, but in one case, the woman has money and many more options -- for instance, she could decide NOT to market herself to men -- where the victim of genital mutilation might have no options at all for education or career that could be an alternative to marrying well

i think designer vaginas are stupid but to each her own, she has a choice to do it or not, or to find another way to make herself attractive to a man or not

in the other case, the young woman likely has no future at all if her family can't sell her to a man, so her own pleasure and choices are not considered

to me there is a HUGE difference


one is a matter of bad taste and personal choice, the other is a matter of economic and social coercion

...but he claims we are such brainwashed dweeby idiots we cannot say "no" to all that massive pressure for a Designer vagina...even though most of us have never even heard of it...
Lee

sequins and a stop and go light .

I also want it to be signed by the designer , so that when I take it out for a walk I can brag about my cool designer vagina!


good grief what will they think of next!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

vaginal reconstruction. Infants can not. That is a HUGE difference. Also, I don't know anybody who's tried to convince me or any of my friends to suffer through vaginal reconstruction. It's not that big of a trend.

I hate this.

...any uglier than I thought was normal, I might consider some kind of surgery.

I really do think this whole analogy is (forgive me) a stretch.

:shrug:

No one's stopping you.

and you will see why there's no thread on designer penises.

have cosmetic surgery compared to the people in other Western countries. Not only designer vaginas and penis enlargements but boob jobs. If it is much more prevalent there --which I suspect -- I wonder how much is owing to the efforts of rapacious plastic surgeons and the willingness of the media to depict fantastic make-overs (free advertising) and make the whole issue culturally desirable rather than absurd.

But then what do I know, I'm nearly 70 and can't begin to understand why people resort to cosmetic surgery for anything but horrible birth defects or disfiguring accidents.

to ensure virginity after sewing up the vagina.

There is a big fucking difference.

Sorry. This subject is serious and female genital mutilation is barbaric.

I mean, I'm a guy, so I'm no expert on these matters. But when I watched the show Doctor 90210 it seemed to me he was doing Labia reduction which are the folds on the sides of the vagina and not the clitoris itself, which is the center of female sexual stimulation. At least they seem to really like that spot. :-)

Surely your question is a joke?

They can do hymen reconstruction, which opens itself up to all sorts of abuses...imagine some preacher informing his flock that Jesus will curse anyone who enters the marriage bed with no hymen, so everyone check your daughters tonight and run them over to Jones and Smith Sexual Purity Center if you don't find one.

I know, I know, I know, this is supposed to be for women who remarry, so their new husbands can have the "privilege" of "deflowering" them. Which, of course, is a silly notion when you bring your three children on your honeymoon.

make me want to hurl. Seriously disgusting reflection on our society. Really, if a man needs, wants or requests that then he is way out of line. God, I feel so creeped out seeing those words like that again I can't even explain it! I was raised on that shit. :puke:

Not directed at you, I got your point.

that Wanda Sykes always talks about. :)

Personally, I think all the vagina makeovers of the last few years are WEIRD. We're women. We look the way we look. It was good enough for thousands of years - and suddenly, now, when women are the most liberated ever - our vaginas aren't okay anymore???

:crazy:

Some ladies need to volunteer at a soup kitchen a little more often, that's what I think.

the issue of operating conditions is real. but then there are FGMs that are done in hospital conditions as well. and places that don't do FGM in hospital conditions often do other procedures w/o such conditions, too (branding to cauterize wounds for example).

but your question really has to do with issues of manufacturing consent and the issue of de jure and de facto control of a populace. you're not going to get (easily) a logical debate in DU about that. most people cannot figure out that they live in an environment that routinely conditions them. and, even though there are those that can fend off a portion of conditioning, there are others that cannot. and little appreciation of how powerful such conditioning is is expressed here. that is why de facto manipulation is so insidious; through manufactured consent you give the illusion of freedom. the result is the same -- control -- but the populace would need to be far more introspective and resilient in their thinking to truly appreciate the parallels.

there is a reason seduction and coercion is considered amoral in studies of ethics; it is the subtle abuse of power to get what you want. it may not be an overt abuse of power, such as outright oppression, but in the end it is still an abuse of power. i think the populace has only been waking up to how much potential this form of abused power has in the past 100 or so years. remember, the great horrible movements of our times have been immensely aided by media and propaganda. to discount all such situations, like what you're talking about for example, that "we all are free and have a choice," might be dangerously simplistic. but that never stopped people from pointing their fingers and blaming "the other."

I have to agree with your sentiment, though the two situations are different because of the voluntary nature of the designer vaginas.

If a woman wants her vagina tightened or her navel pierced or that 4th tattoo or those acrylic nails ...she can do so if she wants to...

But when a female child is forced by an individual in her family or the state to undergo a procedure such as FGM in order to make her more marriageable...and give her future husband the knowledge that "no man has been here before"...because he has to slice her open on their wedding night....then that is not choice...that is torture.

C.S. Lewis (Anthony Hopkins) and Joy Gresham (Debra Winger) are at an Oxford social gathering when one of the men there starts spouting all sorts of reactionary, anti-woman drivel.

Joy quietly says to him, "Are you saying that just to goad me, or are you really that stupid?"