Vaginal Modification Rough Draft
Background
Vaginal rejuvenation (also known as “designer vaginas” or “Stepford vulvas”) is believed to be “the fastest growing emerging growth trend in cosmetic plastic surgery.”[1] This procedure, which has grown particularly popular in the past decade and a half,[2] has two distinct purposes: one acts as a cosmetic procedure and the second is for the purpose of heightening sexual satisfaction. For the purpose of this paper I will be exploring vaginal rejuvenation’s cosmetic function, also known as a labiaplasty, and its cultural implications in the America.
Background
Vaginal rejuvenation (also known as “designer vaginas” or “Stepford vulvas”) is believed to be “the fastest growing emerging growth trend in cosmetic plastic surgery.”[1] This procedure, which has grown particularly popular in the past decade and a half,[2] has two distinct purposes: one acts as a cosmetic procedure and the second is for the purpose of heightening sexual satisfaction. For the purpose of this paper I will be exploring vaginal rejuvenation’s cosmetic function, also known as a labiaplasty, and its cultural implications in the America.
Male Sexuality in the Public Sphere
First it is important to note the difference of sexual socialization for men and women in order to understand what drives women to undergo such a surgery. Although it may be obvious that two different genders would experience sexual socialization in different manners, it should be noted how one common thread for the two is the subjection to omnipresent male objects in American society. From record-tall buildings to memorials and monuments, phallic objects are ubiquitous as American cultural symbols making male sexuality an accepted part of public discourse. Additionally one should consider the different locker room experiences women and men have in their teenage years since this, too, acts as an example of accepted openness to male sexuality in the public sphere. In the locker room teenage boys are exposed to one another’s sexual parts by default since their anatomy is external. Juxtaposed with the female locker room experience, women have fewer chances to discover sexual anatomy differences among other female peers since having internal sexual anatomy does not foster an environment for comparison. As one woman disclosed, “Penis is mainstream. Penis is in the movies, in museums, in all those enlargement and dysfunction ads. Vagina and vulva, however, are still under wraps….”[3] Therefore just as one’s parts are hidden so, too, is the knowledge that not every woman’s vagina looks the same. These cultural images and experiences create a society in which men are permitted to discuss/show/expect male physical heterogeneity while women live in a world of the unknown believing they must live up to a physical homogeneity fabricated by society’s assumptions.
First it is important to note the difference of sexual socialization for men and women in order to understand what drives women to undergo such a surgery. Although it may be obvious that two different genders would experience sexual socialization in different manners, it should be noted how one common thread for the two is the subjection to omnipresent male objects in American society. From record-tall buildings to memorials and monuments, phallic objects are ubiquitous as American cultural symbols making male sexuality an accepted part of public discourse. Additionally one should consider the different locker room experiences women and men have in their teenage years since this, too, acts as an example of accepted openness to male sexuality in the public sphere. In the locker room teenage boys are exposed to one another’s sexual parts by default since their anatomy is external. Juxtaposed with the female locker room experience, women have fewer chances to discover sexual anatomy differences among other female peers since having internal sexual anatomy does not foster an environment for comparison. As one woman disclosed, “Penis is mainstream. Penis is in the movies, in museums, in all those enlargement and dysfunction ads. Vagina and vulva, however, are still under wraps….”[3] Therefore just as one’s parts are hidden so, too, is the knowledge that not every woman’s vagina looks the same. These cultural images and experiences create a society in which men are permitted to discuss/show/expect male physical heterogeneity while women live in a world of the unknown believing they must live up to a physical homogeneity fabricated by society’s assumptions.
Living in the Dark leads to Assimilation
With women living experiences which do not nurture exploration or inquisition regarding their sexual body parts, they (along with men) are left to obtain ideal notions of how women’s genitals should look from aspects of culture which display this private sphere such as pornography: “Many doctors who perform the surgeries say the bulk of the women getting this surgery are pressured by men who want them to conform to the way women look in the pornography industry….”[4] Doctors have even reported their female patients bringing in pornographic magazines as the example for which they would like to model their own vaginas.[5] On the other hand there are doctors who admit that it is not women being pressured by men to get such a surgery, but it is the women who find the physical flaws in themselves in their private sphere attributing their dissatisfaction with themselves due to images they have seen in porn-related materials.[6] Regardless of who the doctors say are the ones pointing out the “flaws,” both narratives cite porn as a catalyst for the desire to alter one’s body. If porn has been created and consumed since the invention of cameras, then why has this obsession with perfecting one’s vagina become so popular? I postulate this trend is due to the proliferation of pornographic images in America’s mainstream society[7] in MTV music videos, reality television, easily accessible sexual content via youtube, and of course mainstream instances likened to Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction.” These images are all instigators.
With women living experiences which do not nurture exploration or inquisition regarding their sexual body parts, they (along with men) are left to obtain ideal notions of how women’s genitals should look from aspects of culture which display this private sphere such as pornography: “Many doctors who perform the surgeries say the bulk of the women getting this surgery are pressured by men who want them to conform to the way women look in the pornography industry….”[4] Doctors have even reported their female patients bringing in pornographic magazines as the example for which they would like to model their own vaginas.[5] On the other hand there are doctors who admit that it is not women being pressured by men to get such a surgery, but it is the women who find the physical flaws in themselves in their private sphere attributing their dissatisfaction with themselves due to images they have seen in porn-related materials.[6] Regardless of who the doctors say are the ones pointing out the “flaws,” both narratives cite porn as a catalyst for the desire to alter one’s body. If porn has been created and consumed since the invention of cameras, then why has this obsession with perfecting one’s vagina become so popular? I postulate this trend is due to the proliferation of pornographic images in America’s mainstream society[7] in MTV music videos, reality television, easily accessible sexual content via youtube, and of course mainstream instances likened to Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction.” These images are all instigators.
Vaginal Modification and Inclusion
This surgery also acts as a societal divider. While makeup and clothes previously acted as indicators of hierarchical class and therefore wealth, now it is this costly surgery (which is not usually covered by insurance companies) which filters the haves from the have-nots allowing affluent women to consume and perpetuate a narrow view of beauty in the private sphere.
So what if women spend their money on obtaining a “designer vagina” – what societal implications does this have other than women partaking in another cosmetic ritual which alters their natural state? If bodies are a political canvas on which we can adorn clothes, jewelry, etc. which make statements in the public sphere for others to consume and then evaluate about us, then modifications of one’s vagina in order to make it a “carbon copy”[8] of vagina seen in pornography (which is being well-lit with high-end production mechanisms and editing) is a political statement involving women voluntarily disposing of their personal uniqueness and therefore eliminating their political power.
TO-DO LIST:
1) Use the first person narratives of women who have received the surgery as evidence of the dual reasons for wanting the surgery (porn magazines, men/husband’s comments).
2) Incorporate Foucault more and Simone Davis more as my scholarly sources.
3) Expand more on the “So what?” aspect of “carbon copy” vaginas quieting women’s political power as they submit to altering themselves for the purpose of “beauty” in the private sphere.
4) Ask Katie if I need evidence (to cite a source) of the “locker room experience” and linking it to my paper OR is it okay to just use personal experience/knowledge to create links like these?
5) Also, are endnotes okay? Usually use MLA, but I will be citing a lot and do not want to make my paper look messy.
This surgery also acts as a societal divider. While makeup and clothes previously acted as indicators of hierarchical class and therefore wealth, now it is this costly surgery (which is not usually covered by insurance companies) which filters the haves from the have-nots allowing affluent women to consume and perpetuate a narrow view of beauty in the private sphere.
So what if women spend their money on obtaining a “designer vagina” – what societal implications does this have other than women partaking in another cosmetic ritual which alters their natural state? If bodies are a political canvas on which we can adorn clothes, jewelry, etc. which make statements in the public sphere for others to consume and then evaluate about us, then modifications of one’s vagina in order to make it a “carbon copy”[8] of vagina seen in pornography (which is being well-lit with high-end production mechanisms and editing) is a political statement involving women voluntarily disposing of their personal uniqueness and therefore eliminating their political power.
TO-DO LIST:
1) Use the first person narratives of women who have received the surgery as evidence of the dual reasons for wanting the surgery (porn magazines, men/husband’s comments).
2) Incorporate Foucault more and Simone Davis more as my scholarly sources.
3) Expand more on the “So what?” aspect of “carbon copy” vaginas quieting women’s political power as they submit to altering themselves for the purpose of “beauty” in the private sphere.
4) Ask Katie if I need evidence (to cite a source) of the “locker room experience” and linking it to my paper OR is it okay to just use personal experience/knowledge to create links like these?
5) Also, are endnotes okay? Usually use MLA, but I will be citing a lot and do not want to make my paper look messy.
[1] “Men Coerce Women into Vaginal Cosmetic Surgery,” Off Our Backs, 35: 9, January 2005.
[2] “More Women Seek Vaginal Plastic Surgery,” Sandy Kobrin, 4, November 2004.
[3] “A Vagina Owner’s Guide,” Paula Spencer, Health, April 2007.
[4] “Men Coerce Women into Vaginal Cosmetic Surgery,” Off Our Backs, 35: 9, January 2005.
[5] “Men Coerce Women into Vaginal Cosmetic Surgery,” Off Our Backs, 35: 9, January 2005.
[6] “A Vagina Owner’s Guide,” Paula Spencer, Health, April 2007.
[7] “Loose Lips Sink Ships,” Simone Weil Davis, Feminist Studies, Spring 2002.
[8] “Loose Lips Sink Ships,” Simone Weil Davis, Feminist Studies, Spring 2002.
