Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Smear tests to subordinate women

614 replies

sakura · 06/07/2011 04:30

I have been looking at the recent threads about compulsory smear tests in Poland, and I have to say, it doesn'T surprise me that they're compulsory in some countries. THis is a natural, inevitable, progression from the actual purpose of screening.

[Oh, did you think smear tests were about saving women's lives?!?!]

wildkittydear made an excellent point (I hope she doesn't mind me quoting her}
"It is shocking that Poland is thinking of making very personal medical examinations for women compulsory. I personally am very offended by the way only breast and cervical cancer are championed as the only killers of women and I know that is an exaggeration!! but do you get my drift? Some illnesses get priority in the media and I am not convinced there is always a benign reason for this."

Yes, Womanhood is the "problem" to be cured. Women's organs that are seen as faulty-- because men don't have them. Not male = pathology.

The truth is that women's bodies are much, much healthier than men's because we have two Xs in our chromozomal make up and each X contains lots of life-preserving genes, whereas the Y is slightly pitiful by comparison.
This is why women live longer and why boys are more like to be born with chromozomal abnormalities or die when they get sick. Girls tend to recover.
The extra X gives women the biological upper hand.

Men don't really know how to look after their bodies either, in a general sense (healthy diet etc)

Considering this, it's really important to question why the medical fraternity is obsessed with getting women to their tests and not men. Men are more likely to contract all sorts of diseases and cancers, and much earlier in their life than women too.

But men are trusted to look after their own bodies and decide for themselves whether they want to be screened or not. There is no goverment promoted mass-screening programme of testicular cancer, for example. BEcause testicles belong to men, and are therefore regarded as "healthy until proven otherwize"Men are not frightened, coerced or cajolled into being screened because there is no obsession with controlling them.

THe history of medicine teaches us that women, and by default their sex specific organs, are regarded as defective and pathalogical. (when if any sex is defective, it is the male sex due to the Y, which renders them biologicaly more vulnerable to disease in a number of ways)

Greer has covered this in detail in The Whole Woman. She has examined the evidence which shows that cervical screening has done nothing to save women's lives.
Women are still dying from cervical cancer. Although the rate of cervical cancer has been dropping , that is not because of screening, but because because it was actually dropping naturally before mass screening was invented, and continues to drop at the same rate.

Often mistakes are made in the laboratories, and there have been cases of women who actually had healthy cervixes being treated for cancer, and women who had cancer were missed, and ended up dying.

As I said, the point is not to actually save women's lives, but to get women to comply, to STFU and to be penetrated by gynelogical instruments.I don'T get screened, because I've looked at the statistics and found that, despite screening, women are still dying of cervical cancer so the margin for human error in the tests is too great.

Which brings me to another important question. WTF are men doing in gynecology anyway? I mean, WhyTF are they even there? In the room? Sticking bits of metal into women? Researching vaginas, when it's not their place to do so? THe funding should go to female scientists and doctors [but that's for another thread]

I haven't had a smear test for over ten years. WHen I had my first at 18 the results came back telling me I needed to go for a re-test for possible cancerous cells. I went back, had another check, the second time it came back clear (after me scaring myself to death). After doing research I learned that if you have had sperm or even your period (if you'd just finished it) can interfere with the findings, making it look as though there may be cancerous cells when there aren't.

WHat a joke. And the joke's on women. And I haven't been back since.

OP posts:
ZombiePlan · 10/07/2011 00:35

The question is not who has the greater knowledge, but who has the right to have the final say.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 22:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 22:27

Of course they know better. They have studied for years for this, and you have.......... Google.

It is fine to question and research on your own, but you are deluded if you think your few hours of Googling competes with their years of professional training, and in the case of doctors, rigorous education, testing, and practice.

They are not perfect, but they definitely know better than you. Just like your architect knows better than you about construction, and your dentist knows better than you about your teeth.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 22:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 22:05

Given that medical professionals obviously know better, why exactly should they not be able to strongly recommend that you do the tests? If you feel pressured by this, that is I guess unavoidable.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 21:57

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 21:53

Nobody is claiming that. What is your point?

Have you read my thread I linked to? Does it look like I would ever claim that women don't get ignored in maternity?

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 21:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 21:44

"There is a legitimate analysis here about the history, purposes and practices of the medical profession"

Really? I'd like to hear about your legitimate analysis.

Does it involve sinister male-infested gynecology profession conspiring to give unnecessary smear tests to women to control them?

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 21:41

"I have to retain the right to decide for myself free from pressure"

Nobody is saying that you don't. All the hospital is doing is to offer these tests.

" if you wouldn't abort why even have the early tests"

Because they sometimes pick up problems that can be fixed in utero or for which you'd rather be prepared at birth. For example, a friend's baby was diagnosed with a heart problem in one of these antenatal ultrasounds, and a whole team of doctors was present at her birth. Without this team, her baby would not have survived birth.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 21:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 21:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 21:31

Re antenatal testing, I would say we are already at the point where you would be considered mad or negligent to refuse free diagnostic tests that might pick up serious problems with your baby.

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 21:29

I can, and I did. Get over it. The more you refer to it, the more we will talk about it, so maybe best to drop it.

As I said before, mistakes and even malpractice in gynecology is not news to me. Here is one of my myriad threads on the trauma that was DD's birth, if you are interested.

Twisted and completely bonkers statements like women are superior to men because X chromosome is better than Y chromosome and smears are there to control women and penetrate them with instruments for no good reason are not about "nature of health care for women and maternity care and so on" at all.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 21:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 21:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 21:13

I had never heard of "female separatist", either, and so Googled. Very strange, indeed.

Is it supposed to be female supremacist, as well, or was sakura improving on female separatism with her "women are superior to men, look at X chromosome vs Y chromosome" line?

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 21:11

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

LeninGrad · 09/07/2011 20:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

exoticfruits · 09/07/2011 17:42

Thank you GothAnneGeddes-you learn something new everyday. They may be 'ten a penny views' but I have never come across female separatists before and just thought her unhinged. I have googled it and see that it is a very controversial view even among feminists. It explains a lot. (it also explains a lot on other threads). I can see now why I have always thought myself a feminist and yet seem not to be-the deep shade of pink is even deeper than I possibly imagined. (t isn't something that I agree with)
So sorry Alice-I thought it had to come from deep trauma-I didn't realise there was another explanation.

sparky12345 · 09/07/2011 17:16

yep-i can see what youre saying GothAnneSmile-im not exactly on about Sakura-but as you say youre on about a paticular viewpoint-so am i!

GothAnneGeddes · 09/07/2011 17:07

Sparky I'm talking about female separatist views. Sakura's argument is steeped in female separatist language. I pointed this out to explain that the OP was not written as a result of trauma (AFAIK), but from a particular viewpoint.

Alice - when people talk of 'genetic inferiority', I reserve the right to get very angry indeed.

sparky12345 · 09/07/2011 16:36

well-looking at things from diffrent angles as usual-
im sorry but if women are saying this[....are ten a penny]im concerned.
often its the middle class women who have the voices in feminism.
the very women who if things go pear shaped can get privite treatement[quicker treatement]
so-i feel like views like this is actually dangerous for working class/underclass women.

AliceTwirled · 09/07/2011 16:31

What?? Hmm

So you can only make macro scale analysis if you have been "thwarted by a painful experience in her past". I really don't get that.

I'm reading that recounting personal experience is OK. Suggesting individual malpractice is OK. But to connect personal experience to a wider societal context means you are insane and driven to it by some problem with you. Confused

That would make a heck of a lot of people over history wrong about a heck of a lot of things, and nullify a heck of a lot of social movements.

I find it really odd that people are so angered by Sakura's post as to label her mad and in need of help Confused Her post reads like a reframing of something that we take for granted through an alternative lens to me.

Agree, don't agree, meh. But the anger, hostility and madness accusations Hmm

CoteDAzur · 09/07/2011 14:28

Some of those posts on childbirth threads are from me, talking about my traumatizing first birth and subsequent efforts to obtain a ElCS. Trust me, I do know that doctors sometimes do harm.

There is a big difference between talking about doctors' malpractice and saying smear tests are an elaborate ruse by the male-dominated medical profession to control, subjugate, and forcefully penetrate women with gynecological instruments Hmm

The former is completely normal. Of course, we will all talk about problems we see or have witnessed in hospitals.

The latter is only comprehensible if the judgement of the person saying it is thwarted by a painful experience in her past Sad This is why people here have suggested seeking professional help.

Swipe left for the next trending thread