I just read this article in Marie Claire

[njbeachgirl]

Here's the story

I read it when I was having my hair done last night

I just can't believe they are bashing adult, consenting women who are CHOOSING to have this plastic surgery, and are calling it genital mutilation. Yet, it's perfectly OK to do this to newborn boys who have no say in the matter?

"In all cultures, using a surgical procedure to conform to an external definition of what a woman's genitals are supposed to look like is mutilation."

But it's OK to use a surgical procedure to conform to an external definitition of what a male's genitals are supposed to look like? Why why why???

I'm upset that they made NO comparison here to male circ when there was such an obvious opportunity to do so. I sort of want to write them a letter but I don't know where to start. Help?

[Dave2GA]

Why not write a short letter to the editor expressing your views. Even if it isn't printed someone will read it and someone may reconsider male circ.

[LavenderMae]

The hypocrisy is astounding.

[glongley]

Originally Posted by njbeachgirl

[
I sort of want to write them a letter but I don't know where to start. Help?

Absolutely, write a letter!! This is how change happens. That "sort of want to write a letter" feeling is your inner voice telling you that someone needs to speak out about the disconnect between this article and male circumcision. And that SOMEONE - who happens to have read the article and noted the disconnect with passion - was YOU! (And anyone else who reads it...)

Don't know where to start? Just take what you wrote above, and just rework it a little. You've already got your ideas down on paper - just massage them a bit. It can be pretty short and sweet. The idea is simply to bring it to their awareness. Almost anything will do, though I always encourage rationality and respectful communication over hysteria or bashing.

There are more and more of us with the consciousness to catch these issues in the newspaper, magazines, TV shows etc. The more letter writing that comes of that awareness, the sooner others will become aware, the sooner change will happen, and the more empowered we are to be an agent of the change.

Thanks for posting this.

Gillian

[latinalonestar]

I left a comment. What an idiotic article. HELLO????? I'm so tired of the "girl power" culture. I mean I am all for helping women but our boys are just being left behind and ignored.

[Nandi]

I just wrote to who I hope is the right author!

[Haselnuss]

Although it obviously doesn't compare to what happens to baby boys in our culture, I actually tend to find the whole phenomenon the article discusses rather sick - and I'd say it is part of the same sickness that tells us there is something wrong with the normal penis, and a mutilated one looks "better" or even "more natural".

[tlh]

Read this.


Join NWHN ally, the New View Campaign, on November 17 in New York to protest the genital cosmetic surgery industry that is medicalizing women's sexuality!


http://www.nwhn.org/alerts/details.c...message_id=191

http://www.mothering.com/discussions....php?t=1006026


Plastic Surgery Below the Belt

http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...859937,00.html

[perspective]

Personally I have no problem with women who CHOOSE to do this. One thing that I have learned is body modification is a powerful thing. When forced on someone it can alter the way they interact with their culture, it can repress their sexuality and self value. (And I am saying this about male AND female circumcisions)

But on the other hand someone who chooses body modification for themselves can be a very self empowering experience. And I am in full support of it.

My only concern here is that women fully understand the whole surgery before they jump for it.

[njbeachgirl]

Perspective- I totally agree.

While I do think it's a shame that some women might feel the need to do this at least they are consenting adults. What they do with their own bodies is their business.

What angered me was the fact that the author is up in arms about this, but the mainstream media thinks doing the same thing to baby boys is OK

[Haselnuss]

Originally Posted by perspective

But on the other hand someone who chooses body modification for themselves can be a very self empowering experience. And I am in full support of it.

I think you're failing to appreciate the degree to which arbitrary, external beauty standards influence women. I doubt very many women cared whether their labia were symmetrical or not, for instance (or even noticed it) until this surgery began to be marketed to them. Having a negative self-image imposed on one by the media (designed for that purpose) and then having surgery to remedy it is anything but empowering.
Most of this could be compared to adult intact men who choose to be circumcised because of pressure from girlfriends/society in general. I wouldn't compare it, in most cases, to something like a piercing or tattoo, which could be seen as a form of self-expression - these surgeries are marketed as a way to correct what is portrayed as a flaw, not to express one's individuality.
And since there is no objective basis for saying small labia are better than larger ones (unlike, for instance, fitness is preferable to obesity), this is basically an externally imposed sense of dissatisfaction with ourselves.
FWIW, I wouldn't ban the procedure - but perhaps advertising it should be banned!

[robertandenith]

I have to be honest here you guys...

I wanted to have this procedure done to myself

...but not anymore!

I have to learn to love myself the way I am and to accept the beautiful imperfections because they are there for a reason! Mostly, they are there to remind me my beautiful kids!

I will not change that and I have learned to accept it because now I see the importance of loving yourself the way you are

[perspective]

Originally Posted by Haselnuss

I think you're failing to appreciate the degree to which arbitrary, external beauty standards influence women. I doubt very many women cared whether their labia were symmetrical or not, for instance (or even noticed it) until this surgery began to be marketed to them. Having a negative self-image imposed on one by the media (designed for that purpose) and then having surgery to remedy it is anything but empowering.
Most of this could be compared to adult intact men who choose to be circumcised because of pressure from girlfriends/society in general. I wouldn't compare it, in most cases, to something like a piercing or tattoo, which could be seen as a form of self-expression - these surgeries are marketed as a way to correct what is portrayed as a flaw, not to express one's individuality.
And since there is no objective basis for saying small labia are better than larger ones (unlike, for instance, fitness is preferable to obesity), this is basically an externally imposed sense of dissatisfaction with ourselves.
FWIW, I wouldn't ban the procedure - but perhaps advertising it should be banned!

Well if there are women who are just getting this done because they feel insecure about their body, then of course those women should not be having this surgery, because there problem is not their body, but the way they look at their body.
In the same way I think its wrong for some guys get circumcised when they are older, because of outward pressure.


But there are situations where the desire for body modification comes from an inward desire of self expression, and self control. In those situations female or male circumcision can be a very positive experience. Banning adult female or male circumcision, or that the option exists would be a horrible thing.

There just needs to be a careful interview process that needs to be taken place first, like all plastic surgeons are required to do before they go any farther with someone.

[LavenderMae]

Originally Posted by Haselnuss

I think you're failing to appreciate the degree to which arbitrary, external beauty standards influence women. I doubt very many women cared whether their labia were symmetrical or not, for instance (or even noticed it) until this surgery began to be marketed to them. Having a negative self-image imposed on one by the media (designed for that purpose) and then having surgery to remedy it is anything but empowering.
Most of this could be compared to adult intact men who choose to be circumcised because of pressure from girlfriends/society in general. I wouldn't compare it, in most cases, to something like a piercing or tattoo, which could be seen as a form of self-expression - these surgeries are marketed as a way to correct what is portrayed as a flaw, not to express one's individuality.
And since there is no objective basis for saying small labia are better than larger ones (unlike, for instance, fitness is preferable to obesity), this is basically an externally imposed sense of dissatisfaction with ourselves.
FWIW, I wouldn't ban the procedure - but perhaps advertising it should be banned!

:

[riverscout]

I just don't see the problem here. No where in the article did it say RIC is "perfectly OK." I think I would just take the article at face value and not assume they feel RIC is acceptable just because they didn't mention it in an article about cosmetic surgery for women in a women's beauty magazine. It's a brief article that needed to stay focused. It can't cover everything. Would you be mad if you read an article in Jet about race discrimination because it didn't mention gender discrimination? Would you assume the author thought gender discrimination was okay?

[Haselnuss]

Originally Posted by perspective

There just needs to be a careful interview process that needs to be taken place first, like all plastic surgeons are required to do before they go any farther with someone.

Call me cynical, but I have a feeling this interview process would turn into more of a "sales pitch", complete with shocked/horrified expression from the doctor at the horrible, completely unacceptable natural state of the woman's genitals.

[phathui5]

Originally Posted by riverscout

I just don't see the problem here. No where in the article did it say RIC is "perfectly OK." I think I would just take the article at face value and not assume they feel RIC is acceptable just because they didn't mention it in an article about cosmetic surgery for women in a women's beauty magazine. It's a brief article that needed to stay focused. It can't cover everything. Would you be mad if you read an article in Jet about race discrimination because it didn't mention gender discrimination? Would you assume the author thought gender discrimination was okay?

This is what I was thinking. Male circumcision isn't what the article was about.

[njbeachgirl]

No, the article wasn't about male circumcision. I just can't stand the hypocrisy in our culture, about FGM vs. MGM. That's all.

[Nandi]

The author wrote back to me. She said that the person she interviewed had mentioned the connection between FGM and MGM, but she had left it out because of space. She said thanks for bringing the connection to her attention, she had forgotten before my letter brought it back up. It was very positive.

The hypocrisy was particulary prevalant in this line "But in all cultures, using a surgical procedure to conform to an external definition of what a woman's genitals are supposed to look like is mutilation."


Substitute \"man\" for \"woman\" in the above sentence, and you will see what is wrong about choosing to alter the genitals of male infants