Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery (FCGS): Social Engineering Boosts For-Profit Genital Mutilation Racket

According to San Francisco board certified plastic surgeon Dr. Scott W. Mosser, labiaplasty is the most researched cosmetic surgery on the Internet. Mosser and many of his peers say this is due to a growing dissatisfaction among women with poor body image who feel their genitalia looks unattractive. Mosser is one of many surgeons who are financially benefiting from this disturbing trend. As a result, a market is being created for female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS).

Dr. Mosser defended his position claiming that, "anything distracting enough to interfere with a person's lifestyle is something that should be addressed."

Critics Blame Media and Question Medical Ethics

Women's health advocates claim that practitioners of FGCS are capitalizing off of women's poor body image and low self-esteem. They assert that social engineering by the media is driving women's self-confidence to hell in a hog cart.

Women's health advocates hold that it's unethical for the medical establishment to cash in on detrimental body image issues promoted and fomented by the media by its unrealistic depiction of what is "attractive."

Women compare their looks to other women that are deemed desirable. Women see other faces and bodies every day. They also see boyfriends and husbands openly ogling other women, especially on the beaches during summer. This sends the message to women that they're not desirable or attractive enough to their partners or potential dates.

But women's genitals are not prominently seen in public. Their angst over the sexiness or desirability of their own genitals must be coming from somewhere other than TV, movies, advertisements, and the bikini-clad "competition" on the beaches. What is driving this trend in FGCS that is not medically necessary?

Porn Industry to Blame

University of Auckland psychologist Dr. Virginia Braun, a specialist in women's health and sexuality, says there's a lack of knowledge about women's genital diversity. Dr. Braun and others such as Dr. Deborah Tolman from the Hunter College of Social Work blame pornography, which is easily available. Where else would women get the idea to compare their genitalia and give them the notion that their own genitals weren't "normal?"

Women cannot readily compare clitorises, vulvas, and labia because women's genitals are more hidden owing to the way their bodies are designed.

By media and plastic surgeons' accounts, porn is the major driving force in shaping men's preferences and influencing women's self-concept of their own desirability.

Social engineering defines the standard of attractiveness. Desirability is learned, not biologically hard-wired. Consequently, women learn to become consumers of cosmetic surgery — bowing to the pressures of a fraudulent standard of beauty foisted on the public by the media.

Commercializing FGCS services generates discontent. Shows like Dr. 90210 foment an environment for women to develop toxic perceptions of their bodies. They begin considering the "benefits" of FGCS so that they too can enjoy sex and be desirable partners.

FGCS Comparable to FGM

Dr. Leonore Tiefer of Albert Einstein College of Medicine criticizes the trend in FGCS. According to Dr. Tiefer, FGCS should be no more acceptable than female genital mutilation (FGM): the ritual of infibulation (also called Pharaonic circumcision). FGM is widely practiced in the Horn of Africa. Pharaonic circumcision is considered human rights abuse.

Dr. Tiefer does not condone the marketing of FGCS without scientific evidence of its benefits and lack of long-term harm. She maintains that all FGCS does is pathologize female genital diversity.

FGCS is really nothing more than a socially engineered acceptance of FGM cloaked under the respectability of the medical establishment.

Dr. Braun agrees, "in both cases...women's genitalia is being altered to conform to a certain set of notions and expectations of what genitalia should look like."

The copyright of the article Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery (FCGS) in Women's Sexual Health is owned by Jacqueline S. Homan. Permission to republish Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery (FCGS) in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Apr 20, 2009 10:46 AM

Eric :

The best thing would be is to leave the choice to women. I do agree Plastic surgeons and media are taking advantage of w omen's poor image look and capitalizing, but it is the women themselves who have given rise to this trend. The other day I was talking to <a href=" http://drbasner.com/html/baltimore-plastic-surgeon.html" title="Baltimore Plastic Surgeon">Baltimore Plastic Surgeon</a>. He was telling, out of 5 patients who come for labiaplasty,three of them decide for the operation basing on poor body image.

Apr 21, 2009 2:05 PM

Jacqueline S. Homan :

To Eric:

Leave it up to the women. Sounds great. But there's just one problem. Choice made under duress or coercion on any level are not real choices at all.

When women are told, implicitly or explicitly, that they're not worthy of value or deserving of love if their bodies don't look a certain way, the "choice" to go under the knife is really nothing short of blackmail.

In a society where women are valued solely on their looks and their status as "breeders", women are clearly at a disadvangate because men still hold most (if not all) the cards economically.

When women have to fear being unemployable because of their looks, and when women face abandonment by their partners because of the way their genitals look, there exists significant economic threat to women's well-being if they fail to "conform" to standards contrived by well-heeled powerful interests whose wealth and privilege is maintained by artificially creating/manipultaing a market.

May 26, 2009 1:09 AM

Guest :

I agree with you Jacqueline and I agree with your article. Whenyou look at manufacturing, there is an industry standard that is better yo use then others. But when it comes to an individual, why should there be a standard on how one looks. Everyone is different. The porn industry is certainly to blame but so is perhaps all of media and publishing. Many women (and men) purchase magazines at supermarket and drugstore checkout counters paying retail. You pick up a magazine and you see it there. But in terms of the genitalia alone, it is the porn industry. And it's only going to get worse! The internet has created various different aspects of sex addiction which many people have fallen prey too. It truly is a pradoxical situation! How does one fix it???

May 26, 2009 1:11 AM

Guest :

May 26, 2009 1:11 AM

Guest :

Jun 3, 2009 12:33 PM

Guest :

The so called civilised 'modern world' is such that it is emotionally and in this case physically corrosive to all but the most resilient individuals.
I hate the media, I don't own a TV. I read books and research from the net. (a lot of how to D.I.Y. stuff tiling at the moment...) sorry to digress. Most Women, sadly are very susceptible to 'fashion' peer pressure and other shallow ephemeral garbage, (not meaning ti insult intelligent free thinking women, who I admire) I am a man and as such am less concerned about what others think of me, in fact people are sheep, who cares what sheep think ? , I'd like to cut the balls off all those so called doctors 'DO NO HARM, Huh, turn a fast Buck more like...