On the Rising Trend of Elective Cosmetic Labiaplasties

First post in a loooong time - who knew a MA would keep me so busy! This piece is for one of my MA classes and on the rising trend of labiaplasties as a gender equality issue.

Vulvae and labia are possibly one of the only parts of a cis-gendered woman’s body that we see more frequently in media than in real life. Yet they are body parts which receive an incredible amount of scrutiny and are the cause of a great deal of distress for many young people who worry that their labia aren’t ‘normal’. This paper will examine the rising trend of labiaplasties and look at why this is a gender equality issue. It will also explore what, if anything, is being done to promote labia of all shapes and sizes as being ‘normal’.

Why are people going under the knife to alter their labia?

It is important to differentiate between elective cosmetic labiaplasties (and other cosmetic gynaecological surgery) and reconstructive gynaecological surgery which takes place to reduce pain and discomfort after female genital mutilation (FGM). O’Regan states that “labiaplasty is a procedure which trims the labia minora (the inner lips of the vulva) to fit neatly within the outer lips”, which is predominantly done for aesthetic reasons.  


The rising trend in elective, cosmetic labiapasties can be attributed to a number of factors, most notably the presentation of labia in the media. Labia and vulvae are considered ‘crude’ in a way that penises and testes aren’t, and so are rarely portrayed in mainstream media or ‘shown off’ among friends. As such, many young people will have a very limited pool of vulvae to compare their own vulvae to. Therefore, if the source is misleading or not representative of all types of vulvae, insecurity may arise among young people in particular as to whether or not their labia are ‘normal’, or they may be led to believe that there is only one type of ‘normal’ vulva. 
One of the most common sources of depictions of labia is soft porn magazines, or ‘lad mags’. According to Drysdale , Australian soft porn magazines digitally alter the vulvae and labia of models in order to make their genitals look ‘healed to a single crease’ – that is, so that the labia minora are almost completely, if not fully, covered or enclosed by the labia majora. These digital labiaplasties are routinely carried out because Australia’s classifications guidelines state that “realistic depictions [of genitalia] may contain discreet genital detail but there should be no genital emphasis”. While this seems vague, Drysdale notes that as far as the classification board is concerned, inner labia are “too rude for soft porn”. This practice of digital labiaplasty isn’t unique to Australia – Calabrese et al’s study found that in US Playboy magazines, over 80% of vulvae pictured had no visible labia minora, with a further 15% showing very small and ‘neat’ labia minora, largely hidden by labia majora. Only 7% of photos actually showed visible inner labia. Calabrese notes that the models’ genital areas “emulate those of a Barbie Doll”. 

If soft porn magazines are to be believed, this is what most vulvae look like

The rising rate at which people are seeking labiaplasties “may reflect a narrow social definition of normal, or a confusion of what is normal and what is idealised”. As such, we can see that this is an issue of gender inequality due to lack of representation of the diverse range of ‘normal’ vulvae and labia. This happens not only in the soft porn industry, which is targeted for the most part at men, but also in more mainstream media and society. There is a fear that a lot of people are being “duped by the media and by unethical doctors who are preying on their insecurities”, that the sexual objectification of their bodies is leading them to have concerns over the way their genitalia look. 
Vulvae and labia are simply not something that are seen as appropriate topics of conversation – the stigma and shame associated with having a vagina remains a barrier to communicating worries or uncertainties people have with the way their labia look. As such, finding out what is ‘normal’ is considerably difficult, particularly in comparison to the range of dialogue which surrounds what is ‘normal’ in terms of penises and testes. 


However, there is a growing awareness surrounding the different types and sizes of vulvae and labia, and projects like the Great Wall of Vagina are creating an environment in which discourse surrounding labia and vulvae is becoming more socially acceptable. Projects like this, as well as simply having open conversations about the way our bodies look, challenge our perceptions of normality.

A panel from the Great Wall of Vagina, showing the variation in labia shapes and sizes

However, as the documentary The Perfect Vagina (2008) shows, there are still, and will possibly always be, people who are still deciding that that a labiaplasty is a procedure they want or need. It is important to note that controlling other people’s bodies would be problematic in itself. We cannot deny people the ability to alter their bodies, particularly if their mental health is being affected by the way they look, even though these feelings may stem from false representation of how their bodies ‘should’ look in the media. Goodman et al come to the conclusion that while a person definitely has the right to choose a labiaplasty, it should be an informed and counselled choice, and the NHS advises that young people in particular should be advised on solutions other than surgery in response to concerns about their genitalia.



While the reasons people choose to undergo elective cosmetic labiaplasties may vary, one of the core factors is a feeling of non-conformance, of being somehow different. This is often brought on by the narrow, if even present at all, representation of vulvae and labia in the media, and the lack of discourse surrounding the wide range of ‘normal’ labia due to stigma and shame. However, although labiaplasties themselves are a gender equality issue, to deny someone their right to bodily autonomy should they make an informed choice to have the surgery would also be a gender equality issue. As such, we need to promote a greater range of ideas surrounding ‘normalcy’ when it comes to vulvae and encourage positive discourse about labia and vulvae in order to both reduce the rate at which people are having labiaplasties, and ensure that those who continue to have them are making an informed, and therefore empowered, choice. 

On the Separation of Church and State - EWTS Session Three

Notes and thoughts on session 3 of the EWTS conference, which was about Separation of Church and State. Speakers were Ann Brusseel, Annie Laurie Gaylor, Elida Radig and Michael Nugent.

On Schrodinger’s Douchebag

Schrodinger’s Douchebag: make offensive statement, then decide whether or not you were joking based on the reactions of people around you.

The vast majority of vocal or active feminists will, at some point in their lives, have encountered a Schrodinger’s Douchebag.  These lovely people, usually DMAB guys, tend to hijack posts that you might write about issues you’re passionate about and have strong feelings about.

Basically, they act like assholes. They argue against your points, usually using incredibly racist/sexist/ableist/generally offensive ideas in an attempt to undermine your position. When called out on their shit, they either stand by it or say ‘I was only kidding’/’learn to take a joke’/’I was just doing this to wind you up’. However, in the same way it seems impossible to know whether Schrodinger’s cat is alive or dead, it also seems largely impossible to know whether the people acting like douchebags are *actually* bigoted douchebags, or doing it because they find it hilarious to get someone (justifiably) angry. But just as Schrodinger’s cat is actually both alive and dead, these people are both finding joy in your frustration for the lolz and douchebags. There’s no real distinction between the two. Even if their excuse is that they were doing it just to get a reaction and they don’t actuallybelieve what they’re saying; what purpose does that serve? Why do they find it entertaining to enrage you by acting like a douchebag? Because they aredouchebags.

If we don’t get pissed off, if we don’t rise to their offensiveness, they get away with it. They get away with making offensive statements and they will more than likely continue to make them. Yet when we do get offended, as is inevitable, we’re told to ‘just calm down’, sure ‘it’s only a joke’. But it’s not. People who find it entertaining to be offensive to get a reaction aren’t ‘just joking’. They’re doing something intentionally which they *know* is wrong and offensive, and they’re just annoyed that they’re getting called out on it.

I most recently experienced a Schrodinger’s Douchebag alongside some mansplaining. Mansplaining, for those of you who don’t know is, according to the delightful Urban Dictionary definition, “condescending, inaccurate explanations delivered with rock solid confidence of rightness and that slimy certainty that of course, he is right, because he is the man in this conversation”. Basically, the menz *always* know more, even if the woman* they’re mansplaining is an expert in that field, and he isn’t.

Anyway, I had a really shitty lecture (Men in Contemporary Society) in which the lecturer said that relationships are always unequal and the poor menz are under pressure from us mean horrible women to  bring more equality and trust to the relationship, which leads to crisis and the high rates of suicide among young men. This pissed me off, and I took to Facebook to complain. A guy, who I hadn’t seen or spoken to in like 5 or 6 years (we had gone to primary school together) decided to explain what the lecturer actually meant, despite not being in attendance in that class, the course, and who has no background in sociology or women/gender studies. After going on about how us wimminz just play games and he knows this because 90% of his friends are women, he’s clearly not enjoying being given out to by me and some femmo-friends, and admits he was just “trying to wind Becca up” and he isn’t really a misogynist, he just says misogynist things to get a reaction.

In these situations, it is probably easier and better for your blood pressure to just let it go and be like ‘oh, ok’, but this tends to do more harm than good. These guys aren’t necessarily horrible people, they’ve just grown up in a society which holds that this kind of behaviour is acceptable and when women react to Schrodinger’s Douchebag’s, we’re labelled as ‘crazy’ and ‘over-reacting’. Calling these people out on their shit is what, hopefully, begets change. They might realise that what they’re doing isn’t actually alright, or think twice about being an asshole for the lolz next time. Or they might actually be misogynistic assholes, in which case I recommended a large glass of wine and pictures of cute baby ducks to remind you that the world isn’t as shit as it sometimes seems. 

On Periods

Periods are one of those things which everyone knows about, but nobody ever mentions. We need to examine the way we talk and think about periods, but also the way the media deals with them. These are often at odds with each other, as it’s fairly safe to say that when people who menstruate think of their period it rarely involves images of pretty panties, wearing only white clothes and doing excessive amounts of dancing and rollerblading. And for those of you whose lives are straight out of a tampax ad, I envy you.

Because bending like that is great craic until the cramps set in…

The media seems so opposed to dealing with periods, that if you knew nothing about menstruation, you would assume it has something to do with peeing blue liquid onto a pad. The word ‘blood’ is never mentioned, despite that being pretty much what a period is. We seem to be obsessed with maintaining this idea that women* are lovely little clean, delicate creatures and our uterus’ don’t completely shed every few weeks. Sorry to burst your bubble, but despite the fact that I’m assured we only lose a few teaspoons of blood each menses, it sure doesn’t seem that way.

On the topic of pads and tampons, why are they heralded as our only two options? Bleached chemical-y pieces of cotton that you put up your vagina or that make you feel like you’re wearing a nappy. How can every period be a happy period when you risk death through toxic shock syndrome just so you can wear your lacy panties and white shorts?? And why are they so expensive? The average person will have around 400 periods in their lifetime (taking into account 3 pregnancies and about 9 months of breastfed induced amenorah – so really, there could be a lot more than 400…), and yet we have to pay stupid amounts of money just to be able to not bleed on everything. This cost isn’t taking into account the copious amounts of chocolate and wine necessary to deal with PMS and your period. It’s a tough aul life…

We’re conditioned to think periods are dirty or wrong. We’re told it isn’t polite to talk about them, yet they’re constantly used against us in arguments. I don’t think I know a single woman* who hasn’t heard a variation of the phrase ‘you seem angry/upset, you must be on your period’. Because sure, we couldn’t possibly have opinions and feelings about things unless we’re shedding our uterine lining, how could I have forgotten… But while it’s totally acceptable for others (usually guys) to berate us about being on our period and therefore complete harpies, it’s not OK for us to talk about them. Even the word itself is practically considered a swear word and can get you into all sorts of trouble. Recently, duting a radio discussion about abortion in Ireland, a friend of mine made the comparison between a medical abortion and a heavy period. This was a perfectly accurate comparison, and yet all hell seemed to break loose. The man she was arguing with at the time nearly had a stroke and was giving out to her for using such filthy language. Because sure there’s no link at all between periods and reproductive health, she was just being ‘proof of eve’ as Mister Man put it.

Periods suck. I’m not a fan. Zero stars, would not recommend. I got my first period a few weeks before my 12th birthday and a few hours before I was meant to be on stage for a play I was in. My mum was delighted and gave me a big hug. I was already pissed off by it, having had all of 10 minutes experience of it. Ten years later and I’ve learned my periods were more than just annoying, their irregularity was a sign of Poly Cystic Ovarian Syndrome, which basically means my hormones are all over the shop and my ovaries get confused when they try to ovulate. I have special snowflake ovaries. The pill saved me from massively painful and horrible periods, and now I only have to deal with them 4 or 5 times a year. If it wasn’t for my special snowflake ovaries needing the hormone regulation of the combination pill, I’d have the implant or an IUD and no periods at all (that’s the dream).

So yeah, periods are awful. They rarely, if ever, make you want to wear white trousers and smile like an idiot. But the way we discuss them needs a serious upheaval. My period may not be something I look forward to, but it is not dirty or wrong.

On Asterisks and Acronyms

Bit of an informational post for those who don’t know - Due to basically living on tumblr, I tend to type asterisks after gender identities, such as women*, men*, etc.

This basically means people who identify as a woman, or as a man. The way we use language is rarely trans* friendly, and so it can be alienating to not be included.

For me, the asterisk is basically a footnote, so when I write ‘women*’ I’m adding ‘not all women have vaginas and not all people with vaginas are women’, and vice versa for men. I feel that this is important to note, particularly as my first blog will be about periods. Not all people who menstruate are women and not all women menstruate.

While we’re on the topic of trans* inclusivity, the following, in alphabetical order, are phrases that I’ll probably use a good bit:

- Cis(gendered) – 100% alignment between your gender (the way you see yourself) and your biological sex (nearly always based on genitalia at birth). I’m shying away from this a good bit now as many in the trans* community have issues with ‘cis’ being associated with ‘normal’. 

-DMAB – designated male at birth

-DFAB – designated female at birth

-LGBTQAI* stands for Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, the Trans* community, Queers, Asexuals, Intersexuals and then the * is basically or any mix thereof. The reason it’s become a longer acronym is due being more inclusive and representational.

-MRA – Men’s Rights Activist, those who cry ‘what about the menz??’ and use phrases like ‘feminazi’. See also: scum of the earth.

-POC/WOC – people of colour/women of colour

-QUILTBAG - stands for Queer/Questioning, Undecided, Intersex, Lesbian, Trans*, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay. A more pronounceable version LGBTQAI*

A final note, I’m not perfect. I’m a white DFAB for-the-most-part-heterosexual woman. As such, I am aware that I’m coming to a lot of issues from a privileged point of view. I will try my very best to be inclusive and not an asshole, but please, if I fuck up, call me out on my shit. Unless, you’re a butthurt MRA or an anti-choicer, then you can fuck right off <3