Kelsey Warkentin-Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery

Kelsey Warkentin

Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery is a fairly new practice around the world. It involves multiple procedures that claim to improve the functional and aesthetic aspects of the vagina. Some procedures include clitoral hood reduction, labiaplasty or vaginal rejuvenation. Plastic surgery is nothing new, but why has it expanded to the female’s genitalia? Why do women feel the need to get these surgeries all of a sudden? And what factors are influencing their choice? These questions are beautifully answered in “Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery: A Critical Review of Current Knowledge and Contemporary Debates”, “The Women are Doing it For Themselves”, and Professor Jafar’s Ted Talk video.

« Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery: A Critical Review of Current Knowledge and Contemporary Debates » really expanded on the details of these surgeries and why women get them. Over recent years, the « designer vagina » has been apparent in advertisements and medical websites. Surgeons and media claim that these procedures are perfectly safe and necessary. But these doctors aren’t marketing their techniques, just the outcomes. In reality, FGCS is just an example of an “uncritical adoption of surgeon marketing and the commercialization of medicine”. They are normalizing plastic surgery and enhancing the medicalization of women’s sexuality. While the media plays a huge part in these increasing surgeries, what people need to understand is WHY women are undergoing FGCS. Most say its for aesthetic and functional reasons. That they get labiaplasty because they want to look cleaner or make their sex life better. Others say they feel embarrassed of their female genitalia and they want the surgery to improve psychological concerns. Most women who get these surgeries have little understanding of  “female genitalia diversity”. They don’t care about the risks or that lots of surgeries are going wrong. They just care about what society perceives as the “ideal vulva” or “designer vagina”. Whether its because of the media, advertisements, mainstream porn, or criticism from their spouses…there is a new anxiety of the female genitalia appearance that can’t be ignored.

            A majority of the points from the previous article overlap in “The Women are Doing it For Themselves”. Yet what this next article really analyzes is the meaning of choice. Because we aren’t being forced to undergo FGCS, it is considered socially acceptable. The fact that women have a choice nowadays is seen as an empowering, post-feminist ideal. But is this choice that women have an individual choice? Braun states in this article that “individual choices are culturally situated and culturally shared”. While women might tell surgeons that they are making this decision for themselves, would they really have had to make the decision if it wasn’t for societal pressure? 50 years ago, most women wouldn’t have thought twice about the appearance of their vulva. Now, shifts in bodily practices are creating new worries for women (as if they don’t already have enough). So a women might say getting FGCS is an individual choice, but they were most likely influenced my outside pressure such as media or porn. Another part of this article that is also mentioned in Professor Jafar’s video (which I will expand upon later), is the idea of femininity. Some may say that women’s choosing to better themselves is inspiring. Others argue that it is oppressing because they are being over-scrutinized for their appearance. No matter which standpoint you choose to take, it is important to note that femininity and the meaning of beauty are changing as we speak. FGCS will soon become as normal as nose or breast surgery if we don’t do anything about it.

            Lastly, I would like to talk about Professor Jafar’s Ted Talk video. She started with talking about the big picture of sociology. That one needs to figure out the larger context of issues in order to understand them. She also used an analogy of the umpire, and that a sociologist would say that “it ain’t nothing till I call them”. This example reminded me of the discussion we had in class of meaning and objects. Everything means nothing until we give meaning to it. Professor Jafar talked about Bollywood actresses, Pakistani models and the meaning of progress. The World Health Organization characterizes female genital mutilation as foreign and dangerous. But what Professor Jafar explained in the video is that FGM overlaps significantly with FGCS. We see FGM as something that’s unprogressive. But how different is the removal of the clitoris (FGM) versus the reduction of one (FGCS)? In “modern” countries, we see FGCS as progress and a way to help self-esteem. Both of these practices are a way to show femininity, so why is one being cast as barbaric? It is a question that sociologists are still trying to understand. But like Professor Jafar says in the end of the video, it is necessary to pay attention to what we give meaning to in order to understand the social constructions of reality.

            All of these informing articles talk about the sociological aspects of FGCS and what it’s creating. Whether it’s the idea of choice, femininity, the media or beauty, FGCS is not going away any time soon. Despite reading these articles with an open mind, I couldn’t help but to feel self-conscious in a way. I probably experienced similar thoughts to the women who got the surgeries. Even though I knew it was ridiculous, that just proves the effect that society has on women. We constantly feel the need to be perfect and have the ideal body. And like Professor Jafar said, it is actually quite depressing to know the world has gotten so ignorant and critical.