Leave it out Stavvers, it’s not worth it, my inner monologue screams.
But no. No irritation too small for me. No tripe too trivial to miss the opportunity to open dialogues which are missed by the mainstream. Today is some utter bollocks in the Guardian (as it so often is). It’s title is mercifully reflective of its content: “Shame on those who practise intimate cosmetic surgery“.
It’s not often that a piece of shaming is so helpfully labelled, as make no mistake, this is what the entire article is about. And no, it’s not about shaming cosmetic surgeons who practise it, which would be, while still problematic, a little better. It is by someone who thinks she’s being funny, shaming women for wanting to have cosmetic surgery on their genitals. Cis women. It’s abundantly clear by “women” she means “cis women”, as these sorts are wont to do.
Now, there is a conversation to be had about cosmetic surgery on cis women’s genitals, the kind of thing which is done entirely for aesthetic reasons. Most of the surgeons who do it are men who have never had a cunt, and most of them thing that what they’re doing will have no effect on sexual pleasure, which is something a lot of people with cunts disagree with. They’re also doing it for money, profiting off of a beauty ideal which they themselves helped create by performing similar procedures on porn performers, which is, a lot of the time, the only cunts that heterosexual cis women get to look at. They’re creating a need for a product they provide, and it’s a vicious circle and it’s fucked up and let’s not even begin to unpick all of the intersecting bollocks: why is that ideal cunt image we’re sold a white woman’s cunt? Why don’t we talk about how much the medical establishment fails trans women? To have these conversations, we cannot shame people for taking the bargain of undergoing these procedures. It’s fucking complicated, it’s fucking structural, and nothing’s going to change with shame.
Alas, this is not the conversation the Guardian wants to have. The Guardian’s conclusion?
That it would be nice if more boyfriends said they liked their partner’s cunt.
I despair, I really do.
Another angry woman 
I am reading the Guardian less and less often, and shit like this is the reason why. There is a conference this year on body modification and feminism, I so wanted to give a presentation on my piercings, because of course I have had my genitals altered and part of the motivation was to please a man. That it can be a pro choice, feminist position about autonomy, agency and the power of personal modification is perhaps too complex for the narrative the Guardian wants to push.
That article is barely fucking coherent, as well as utter rubbish in the ways you’ve described. CiF is getting worse by the day.
I can’t remember where I read/saw it, but I totally agree with the idea that most hetro men probably don’t really care if a women has a few stretch marks, or scars, or looks not the same as the ideal porn women. Just the fact that she’s willing to get naked with him, and have fun sexy times together is amazing, and those other things? They don’t matter jack.
—–
I just looked up labiaplasty on Wikipedia. That lead to ‘anal bleaching’, and that lead to, WTF? What is wrong with people? Your body is beautiful just the way it is, and it doesn’t have to be uniform and the same colour all over!
I’m not sure if my point is coherent, or even if I have a point. I apologise in advance.