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:
Bandwithering · 06/07/2011 11:34

I do agree with Sakura's post 10.23. The reason young women don't identify with feminism is because men don't like feminism. This is the biggest reason.

porpoisefull · 06/07/2011 11:35

So, women in Poland, whatever their personal history (sexual abuse, mental health issues, whatever) could lose their jobs if they do not undergo smear tests. No question in my mind that screening is a good thing and saves lives, but that is shocking. How can this legislation be compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights? Wouldn't it be liable to be overturned that way?

SardineQueen · 06/07/2011 11:35

Read poledra's first link, it says that women will have to submit to a range of tests including smear (younger women) or breast checks (which my mum informs me are very uncomfortable/painful) (older women) in order to be allowed to work. Men will not have to submit to any tests in order to be allowed to work.

That is completely mad isn't it? Like something out of an insane film?

SardineQueen · 06/07/2011 11:39

The underlying ideas that would lead to any society even having this idea, how they view women, that's just no good, is it?

I can see that if Sakura has found out about this and has awareness of issues surrounding medicine and women, and having just read a book which argues that smears are no good, that it could come out in a rant like the opening post.

Can anyone believe that they are seriously considering this in Poland? I mean, we all get that Sakura blew a fuse in her OP, but the issue she raises is huge, isn't it?

The ramifications of this move are so huge I can't even being to express them.

GrimmaTheNome · 06/07/2011 11:41

Annie - yes.... it does look like its a horrible conjunction of authoritarianism and misogyny. The public health aim may have come from people who meant nothing but good but this is totally and absolutely the wrong way to go about it.

swallowedAfly · 06/07/2011 11:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

SardineQueen · 06/07/2011 11:48

here is another link to the petition about it, with a heartfelt plea for people to sign.

winnybella · 06/07/2011 11:56

Ok, people.

It seems it's not happening. Too many people were against this idea.

The government is thinking about doing it other way, like writing the screening into a bill of public health, but for the moment it's not happening.

winnybella · 06/07/2011 12:00

Ah, sorry, it may be happening all over again. Bit confusing.

MamaChocoholic · 06/07/2011 12:00

link please winnybella?

winnybella · 06/07/2011 12:09

Mama- I was googling in Polish, can you speak it?

Basically, there's plenty of entries from 2008, 2009 and 2010 when the first form of the project was being debated. That didn't happen because they tried to put it into work law instead of public health and it , obviously, isn't employer's problem or obligation to provide cervical screening and mammograms. So now the government is trying to put the bill under the public health law-I don't know whtehr that would mean that all women would have to do it, not just working ones. So yeah, seems they're still thinking about doing it. They are also planning to increase awareness in other ways, i.e. through doctors etc.

Btw the employer would not be informed of the results of the tests.

MamaChocoholic · 06/07/2011 12:14

sorry - no! it's scary (not Polish, this potential law).

happybubblebrain · 06/07/2011 12:35

I agree with some of Sakura's points. Anyone that doesn't believe that the medical/drugs industry doesn't shit on women from a great height needs to look no further than the topic of contraception.

floyjoy · 06/07/2011 12:36

In the midst of all the mocking of Sakura's post it is worth noting that it does raise a very interesting point about how women's bodies, compared to men are more medicalised. It's not just biology surely given that the profession was so heavily male in the past? That would be a really naive view. I remember years and years ago Greer on tv talking about smears and the statement that she made (paraphrasing here) that 'noone wants to talk about the fact that there would be less cervical cancer if men cleaned their penises properly'. I've always remembered that because it reflects, to me, a sense that women's health is seen as very distinct, that it is isolated. I am still surprised that very little attention is given to the role of the Pill in increasing rates of breast cancer. Diet, weight, smoking, genetics are discussed in the media but the Pill is rarely mentioned. So many use it they maybe don't want to hear, but it also suits the patriarchy and the drugs companies to ignore this.

It would be nice if more consideration was given to OPs like this before people waded in taking the piss. The whole point of feminist theory is to question the status quo rather than assume what happens is always as benevolent and innocent as it may seem.

Sidge · 06/07/2011 12:54

boysrock intrusive questions are necessary when assessing whether emergency contraception (EC) can be given. It is not safe or efficacious to give hormonal EC when intercourse has taken place more than 72/100 hours previously, if there has been more than one episode of intercourse in this cycle and what contraception may normally be used, if any. (The newish hormonal contraception Ella One can 'clash' with progestogen-containing pills for eg).

When someone attends for EC it is usually a prime opportunity to assess whether they have appropriate contraception normally, and that may well include a consultation about long acting reversible contraception.

ItsNotUnusual · 06/07/2011 12:55

Well, doesn't this thread illustrate quite neatly what the other 2 monster threads were getting at.

That some people are 'put off feminism' by a passionately committed Radical Feminist with a very strong individual voice raising heavyweight feminist issues which could have consequences for all of us and doing so using challenging language and unpopular concepts.

If I'd written the OP, it would have sounded very different in my 'voice'. Would that have made it more acceptable to some? Who knows?

Sakura may not be changing medical law in EU countries, but is sparking thought provoking debate on the internet, whether you agree with all the entiments or not.

claig · 06/07/2011 12:57

If there is something sinister about it, then I don't believe it is this

'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.'

Out of interest, what does Germaine Greer say the reason is in her book?

Sidge · 06/07/2011 12:59

Oh and back to the OP - compulsory smear testing would be a hideous policy, but to state that smear tests are entirely ineffective and exist only to subjugate women by forced penetration of a gynaecological instrument is frankly absurd.

Until your cervix relocates out of the vagina and starts growing somewhere more accessible then there is no better way to sample it for screening. To choose not to attend for a cervical smear as some sort of feminist protest is only doing yourself a huge disservice IMO.

HandDivedScallopsrgreat · 06/07/2011 13:02

Agree floyjoy and ItsNotUnusual. Its all about shifting the overton window which can be an uncomfortable experience. I may not agree with everything sakura said but it certainly made me think about my mainstream perceptions of semar tests etc.

happybubblebrain - I have often thought that about contraception, pumping women full of hormones. No effort to pump men full of hormones to prevent sperm release, denature sperm or whatever. Not that two wrongs would make a right btw!

claig · 06/07/2011 13:04

'No effort to pump men full of hormones to prevent sperm release, denature sperm or whatever.'

no need to. The sperm count keeps on falling for reasons unclear.

HandDivedScallopsrgreat · 06/07/2011 13:05

True claig!

floyjoy · 06/07/2011 13:17

The lack of male contraceptives is unbelievable. When I was so, so much younger the male pill ws just around the corner...a very large and hard to get round corner.

SardineQueen · 06/07/2011 13:21

The sperm count is falling?

I blame feminism.

Grin
LauraPoppins · 06/07/2011 13:22

itsNotUnusual You are absolutely right, the other thread asked why a woman would not identify themselves as a feminist.

This thread is exactly why, because some feminists are CooCoo for Cocopuffs, totally barking.

SardineQueen · 06/07/2011 13:22

I like the idea of "THE sperm count" as a kind of stand-alone feature that exists somewhere, as well!

I agree with itsnotunusual's post as well