Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
YOUNG TEENAGE GIRLS are having genital cosmetic surgery due to the influence of pornography and advertising, UK experts have said.
According to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), the number of labial reduction procedures has risen five-fold in the UK’s NHS over the past 10 years, with over 2000 operations performed in 2010.
Today, two new papers published by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and the British Society for Paediatric and Adolescent Gynaecology (BritSPAG) state that little research exists about the clinical effectiveness and risks in female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) and that it should not normally be carried out on girls under 18 years.
The RCOG paper, produced by the College’s Ethics Committee, focuses on women of all ages undergoing FGCS.
What is FGCS?
FGCS is:
non-medically indicated cosmetic surgical procedures which change the structure and appearance of the healthy external genitalia of women, or internally in the case of vaginal tightening.
This includes the most common procedure, labiaplasty, as well as others including hymenoplasty (vaginal reconstruction) and vaginoplasty (vaginal rejuvenation).
The RCOG’s paper explores the ethical aspects of FGCS, and looks at the reasons why women ask for these procedures.
Labiaplasty is a procedure undergone for problems relating to the size of the labia minora and concerns with, for example, hygiene, difficulties during sexual intercourse, and discomfort when wearing tight clothes.
But the main reason for requesting labiaplasty for some women can be concern about genital appearance, and in extreme cases this is an aspect of body dysmorphic disorder.
Labiaplasty, like any surgical procedure, carries short-term risks of bleeding and infection. But the experts say that there are no data on the potential physical and psychological risks in the medium and long-term.
They are calling for more data to inform women about the potential of long-term damage to sensitivity and sexual function.
Influence of mass media and pornography
Dame Suzi Leather, Chair of the RCOG’s Ethics Committee, said that they are concerned about the increase in labial reduction procedures, “fuelled in part by the mass media and inaccurate advertising”.
She said that some women’s decisions are influenced by images from popular culture and the pornography industry. “We need to inform women that everyone is unique and that variation in appearance is normal in the vast majority of cases,” she said.
Paul Wood, Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, and chair of BritSPAG said that there is “no scientific evidence” to support the practice of labiaplasty, and that for adolescents the risk of harm is even more serious.
He said that it is important that clinicians inform girls about labial anatomy, its development, and variation.
“In addition girls should be aware of distortions in popular culture, the unknown risks and efficacy of procedures and ways to manage labial discomfort,” he said.
When significant distress is detected, these girls should receive a psychological assessment.
The paper includes a number recommendations, such as:
The BritSPAG position statement focuses on adolescents undergoing labiaplasty, as a result of growing concerns over this type of surgery being performed on girls aged under 18.
It looks at reasons behind surgery, including “accessibility to unrealistic and narrow representations of vulval appearance in popular culture and intensive marketing of labiaplasty as an unproblematic lifestyle choice”.
The paper’s recommendations for best practice include:
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Seems one sided .
@DMur: shouldn’t it be all extremism?
Wonder will the do the same for the black hebrew Israelites. They are super racist homophobic and basically anti everything else!
@DMur: Yup it is. It should be identity politics for everyone or identity politics for no one.
@DMur: Sounds like something a white supremacist would say.
@Keith O’Reilly: No it actually doesn’t.
@andyearley: what about what about what about? What about? What about? Zzzzzzzzz
@DMur: This is open to ferocious abuse from the left. The definition of a white supremacist has been diluted so much recently that simply having a conservative opinion on immigration for example is enough to render you a Nazi in the public eye. Accusations such as these have already been seen to destroy the lives and careers of people who don’t conform to the narrative. Facebook is on a precipice right now and if they continue to find ways to clamp down on free speech (which is what all this is really about) then it’s going to collapse like tower seven never to be seen again.
Let it be said I detest the idea of white supremacy but for the screechers here I feel I have to point it out.
What constitutes “hate speech”? Who decides? Is every person still allowed to express their opinion on something, even if other people may find it distasteful?
@Sirius:
hate speech
noun
abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation.
Amazing news, Trump supporters trying to put rational people into ovens again.
@Orla Smith: another dilusional liberal. Funny how hateful y’all are and then you want to point the fingers at everyone else. The only racists are democrats
I made one negative comment about turnips and now I’m banned from Facebook.
Yet another move by the turnip industry to silence us
@Brian Guilfoyle: This is worse than when Big Parsnip removed my Bebo
@Brian Guilfoyle: that was quite a turnip for the books.
@Brian Guilfoyle: Banned for swede f*-all
@Sean O’ Donovan: Can’t they just lettuce say what we want?
@Brian Guilfoyle: They carrot allow that.
Always best to prohibit and censor the expression of opinions and ideas that you’re unable to counter with reason and debate. Don’t think there’s any precedents in history where driving movements underground has resulted in those movements strengthening as a result either. A win win so, the hard of thinking don’t need to exercise their brains to deal with opinions with which they disagree, and if Facebook says the movements are gone then they’re definitely gone and will never return in the future.
@Orla Smith: the only racist here is trash like you. That symbol on your profile might as well be a swastika.
@Winston Smith: Shares in Homestore just rocketed…
@Orla Smith: Problem is people like yourself cant counter ‘rascit b.s.’ – real or imagined. All you seem to be able to do is call people names instead of providing a rational counter argument. Look back at your comment history, seriously!
GO’D won’t be happy…
About time.
One attack on Muslim’s everything get banned, years of use by ISIS to recruit followers all over the world and nothing happens.
About time.
What took so long?
(((Civil rights groups and academics)))
It’s crazy to see people on one side getting silenced, while the left can spout all the hate they like. Surly this isn’t right
have your say