Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

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:
LeninGrad · 06/07/2011 21:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Hullygully · 06/07/2011 21:45

I agree that the way I feel isn't fair, it's quite a strong feeling tho of not wanting stranger men dabbling with my bits. I don't know what the answer is.

LeninGrad · 06/07/2011 21:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

IWouldNotCouldNotWithAGoat · 06/07/2011 21:48

I am not disputing that there are some pervy/dodgy gynos. I am disputing that the profession exists so that they can get sexual gratification from poking people with a speculum.

Hullygully · 06/07/2011 21:48

yeah but no but. I dunno.

AliceTwirled · 06/07/2011 21:50

IWouldNotCouldNotWithAGoat - the point wasn't about sexual gratification. It comes from the same place as thinking that rape is about power rather than sexual gratification.

Hullygully · 06/07/2011 21:50

No, I odn't think that Goat either. I had one bad experience and it has left me wary (like everyone about everything once bitten etc). Someone medical once told me something v interesting about why men choose gynaecology ie for what professional reasons, but sadly I have forgot it

Hullygully · 06/07/2011 21:51

It may have been something like there was less competition because it wasn't glam like heart ops etc. That would figure.

Sidge · 06/07/2011 21:51

LeninGrad it's making sure you sample the TZ around the cervical os that would be the most difficult part. It's a bit more precise than sticking the brush up there and wiggling it around (but I can appreciate if you've had awful smears it is tempting to do your own.)

nenevomito · 06/07/2011 21:52

I'm really thinking about it now. Would I be comfortable. Hmmm. Not at all sure.

IWouldNotCouldNotWithAGoat · 06/07/2011 21:55

Alice: Point taken, but I'm not sure that makes the premise any less bonkers!

Chipotle · 06/07/2011 22:01

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

LeninGrad · 06/07/2011 22:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

winnybella · 06/07/2011 22:15

Right, so men choose to be gynecologists to exert power over women. Hmm Few, perhaps.

Seriously, instead of being glad that we have means of preventing of cervical cancer, some people on here come up with patriachal conspiracies.

Male and femal reproductive systems are not the same. One poster has explained how prostate cancer usually attacks older men and usually grows slowly. Men over certain age are expected to get their prostates tested. Cervical cancer attacks younger women as well, therefore it makes sense to have regular screening program in place. Even if there is a small percentage of false positives/negatives.

It's just common sense.

winnybella · 06/07/2011 22:16

preventing of

CoteDAzur · 06/07/2011 22:24

"And re abusive smears - The gynea in The Hand That Rocks The Craddle springs to mind."

That wasn't a smear test. It was a gynecologist's routine check-up of a pregnant woman.

GothAnneGeddes · 06/07/2011 23:58

It also was a film and not actually real. Not saying it doesn't happen, but come on!

rainbowtoenails · 07/07/2011 00:46

Sidge, i check my cervix regularly, throughout the month. It's not that obscure an organ and women should be taught to be as familiar with it as their breasts.
Self examination is a much more effective tool against breast cancer than mammograms. I believe the same could be true for cc if it was promoted.

Fifis25StottieCakes · 07/07/2011 00:54

My friend who is 21 cant have a smear test even though she has requested one. Her mam had breast cancer at 32 and laser treatment on her cervix.

I am 32 and have had 2 in 4 years.

Fifis25StottieCakes · 07/07/2011 00:56

Just 2 add. My last one was a one done with water which was much better. It was also carried out by the nurse.

sakura · 07/07/2011 02:34

rainbowtoenails That's really interesting. Women are emphatically not taught to check their own cervix are they?!?!?! I will start doing that, thank you.

ANyway, back to the argument. I fail to see why there is an obsession with cancer of female-specific organs. When I was 17 I had two friends with cancer; one had mouth cancer, another with some sort of throat cancer and yet another friend came down with Lupus. Given this background and context, I still fail to see why cervical cancer is The One To Watch.

And in any discussion about gynecology, it's impossible to ignore history of vicious male experimentation on women. This is the backdrop upon which the current system of gynecology is painted. Compulsory check-ups, heinous experimenting etc. All invented and perpetrated by men, naturally. As I mentioned upthread men would whip women's ovaries and wombs out for made-up reasons such as hysteria or non-compliance to their wifely duties. These atrocities against women did happen in gynecology. THey cannot be ignored in a debate about the subject.

So. It's a fact that gynecology was invented for dubious reasons.
Given this, it's important to question how far the system has moved on from the days when its entire purpose was to control women.

OP posts:
sakura · 07/07/2011 02:39

OH yes, and regarding internal examinations of pregnant women, that is extremely overused. IN Portugal pregnant women are required to have internal examinations.

The midwives that took care of my ante-natal care and who were with me during my homebirths said they were wholly unecessary and that they would only check me if a) I wanted to be checked and b) if I wanted to gauge how far along I was once in labour.
Before a woman goes into labour internal checks of the cervix are actually useless, because even if it appears that things are ready and moving along she might not go into labour until much later. ANd vice versa.. a woman's cervix might be pretty high so it looks like labour won't start for some time, then she might spontaneously go into labour and efface and dilate very quickly. It's very arbitrary. INternal checks tell you nothing, at least that's what my midwives told me.

OP posts:
sakura · 07/07/2011 02:45

Fifi
Yes that is another point I want to make. It should be a women-only area. The issues shouldn't even come up . Men shouldn't even be in the room.
I'm still confused as to why any man would be doing smear tests on women today in 2011, given the godawful history of men's treatment of women in this field.

OP posts:
sakura · 07/07/2011 02:58

rainbowtoenails

I would never have thought of checking my own cervix. Thank you!
Could you give us some info on that.

It also makes perfect sense that self-examination of breasts is more efficient than torture devices mammograms because women know their own breasts better than any doctor or machine, and if they examine them regularly they'll notice changes, won't they. Same with the cervix.

Thanks again.. This thread is bearing fruit Smile

OP posts:
TheBossofMe · 07/07/2011 04:23

What a fascinating thread, Sakura. I love threads like this because (and not intending to offend at all so apologies if I do) on the face of it, they are a bit loony, but then when you scrape below the surface, there?s some interesting, thought provoking discussion buried within.

This is also a subject close to my heart, having now suffered from more than one ?female cancer?.

So, here?s what I think:

Forced/compulsory /coerced smears, internal exams etc = bad, very very bad indeed.

Routinely offering smears, mammograms etc to women = good (as is routinely offering checks for prostate cancer for men). They (and IMO checks for ovarian cancer) should happen because they are ?silent? killers, ie the cancers are often not detectable until they are very far advanced, by which case survival rates can be significantly compromised. I actually think it?s unfortunate that they aren?t offered on an annual basis, or that ovarian cancer checks aren?t offered at all unless you have a previous history.

Offering is different to coercion, however. And if increasing test rates is dependent on ensuring that all women are offered female doctors if they request it, then that is a good thing in my book. FWIW, I couldn?t give a crap what sex the doctor is who?s testing me, so long as they are competent and able to deal with difficult presentations (I once hopped out of the stirrups and got dressed again when the doctor who was about to carry out a procedure said, ?ooh, what an unusual cervix, this may take me a few goes to get this right? and asked for a different doctor who had previously carried out said procedure on me with no problems at all)

And the over-medicalisation of the female body and its inherent complications is a very bad thing too ? my experiences in hospital over the years make me want to cry sometimes when I think about them. Patronising, disempowering, I could go on.