Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Guardian vulvas...

80 replies

Alicethroughtheblackmirror · 09/02/2019 21:11

It's there anything female the Guardian covers without feeling the need to include a male?

Surgical constructions are not the same as the female sex organs and it's insulting they have to be included in a feature on vulvas. Of 8 examples here, one is a male...

Me and my vulva: 100 women reveal all

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/feb/09/me-and-my-vulva-100-women-reveal-all-photographs?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

OP posts:

InionEile · 10/02/2019 19:20

This was a fascinating piece, nice follow up to the penis project by the same photographer. She sounds great - I love how firmly she batted back the woke journalist's comment about being careful about associating vulvas with womanhood, a comment that also elicited the world's longest eyeroll from me.

It was entirely fair to include the transwoman, in my view. She lives life as a woman and has taken the brave step to fully transition, as far as surgery will allow at least. And she acknowledges that she is a transwoman with a neovagina, not a woman like the other born women in the piece who have had miscarriages, cervical cancer and given birth etc. Can't say fairer than that.

terfsandwich · 11/02/2019 07:29

It would have been more progressive to put the neovagina in the penis article, and the trans man's bits in the vagina article. Given it was about sexed bodies not sincerely-felt-internal-essences.

Bouchie · 11/02/2019 07:47

I thought the article was great. This sort of handwringing is annoying and detracts from the main issues surrounding gender identity.
Both articles did make me think genitalia is not the most attractive bits of a person. Which is strange as it would seem to make sense in evolutionary terms to make them appealing.

Ereshkigal · 11/02/2019 08:18

it’s really interesting isn’t it! I wonder whether a penis article published now would have the same bollocks gender line in it. I doubt it. It’s possible too that a womanhood article published in 2017 wouldn’t have raised it either, given how fast woman has become a troublesome word. Lots to think on.

I'm not sure, Sweary. I remember commenting on the penis article at the time on social media for this very reason, that even in the Guardian men were allowed to have their body parts named as men's. This "female body parts are not allowed to be associated with the word woman" nonsense has been going on a while.

SwearyG · 11/02/2019 08:28

Well that answers that pondering - thanks Eresh

HawayMan · 11/02/2019 08:40

It's a brilliant artwork. The photographer sounds great.

Let's face it though, the Guardian never would have published this if a trans woman hadn't been included. I'm surprised there weren't more tbh.

I think that the trans woman included doesn't do much for the GC argument even this her argument is somewhat GC. She makes our argument look a bit silly and minimized since she's not exposing the problem at the center.

Qcng · 11/02/2019 08:43

It would have been more progressive to put the neovagina in the penis article

Oh yes, and that would also be biologically accurate,

In the "Me and my penis" series, the TW experience of their penis would be "I've had mine inverted to appear more feminine" and the TM experience in the "Vulva" series would be "I've had some arm flesh sewn onto my vulva to look something like a penis" (or whatever.)
That would be extremely progressive and reflect reality.

Qcng · 11/02/2019 08:48

My opinion of the cup cake vulva woman, was that she thought
"Oh, I might be featured in a photography project about vulvas.... Hmm, I'd better think of something to say.... uh, hmm... What can I say....?" and just came out with that because she'd been baking cupcakes that day. But she doesn't really think that at all.

RiverTam · 11/02/2019 08:56

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Melroses · 11/02/2019 11:46

I liked the honest account by the 77 year old. We do not hear much from older people about things likes this.

Having a fanny does not make you a woman. If I had mine blown off tomorrow, I would still be a woman. If I had any bit blown of me off tomorrow I would still be a woman, even if it killed me deceased woman dressed in the one design fits anyone shroud

They are interesting though. Noses and ears are all different too. Ears, especially are a good thing to look at to see if your DTs are identical or not

stillathing · 11/02/2019 12:28

I loved this article. I completely agree with the idea of including a proportionate number of trans people - both with or without SR surgery. And I totally agree with PP that they should be included with their natal sex as that is the whole point.

The article is about being born with a particular set of genitals which are on the one hand as unique as a fingerprint and on the other hand belong to a sex class. How we feel about our own genitals is affected by unique life experiences and family backgrounds combined with how the wider social/cultural setting impacts people of your own sex class. Some people believe they have a gender identity which will also influence this. A trans person's experience of their own genitals and how they feel about them surely must make up part of their gender identity and is definitely part of the story for those few with body dysphoria (like the transwoman featured, whose story was fascinating and honest).

MhairiV · 11/02/2019 12:52

I liked this piece for various reasons. I'm relieved that the trans woman included was of a mind to carefully acknowledge the difference between her body and that of a biological woman but mostly I thought there was huge value in illustrating that no two fannies look the same. The comments the piece attracted on social media from (mostly young) men were an eye opener - horror and disgust being common - the result of some weird idea that they should all look porno perfect. Young women need to see this, to know that what they might see as imperfection is actually perfectly normal. That's important.

Melroses · 11/02/2019 13:11

Yes - I saw the same reaction from men on a twitter thread about the economist who stripped on R4.

She looked perfectly normal and beautiful - would have made a wonderful Venus.

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 11/02/2019 13:13

Let’s be up front about this: I don’t have a vagina. I would describe mine as a neo-vagina. I’m not a real woman. I’d have loved to have been one, but that didn’t happen for me and I have to make do. I can’t claim womanhood. I have a different body to women, I have different biology, different needs, I grew up differently. I don’t think it should be something to feel embarrassed or shamed about. I’m a transwoman, and that’s fine by me.

I don't know this person but I respect them for their honesty and wish them all the best.

kalinkafoxtrot45 · 11/02/2019 13:17

I also appreciate the transwoman‘s honesty and perspective. It was good to see this contribution included.

Melroses · 11/02/2019 16:06

This was fun on twitter - not seen it posted

Vixxxy · 11/02/2019 16:11

Interesting addition. I have no issue with stuff like this at all really, its these new 'magical thinking' 'bow down to my lady dick' style TRAs forcing their way into anything to do with women that piss me off.

userschmoozer · 11/02/2019 16:11

Oh ffs. Look at numpty, mansplaining vaginas to a gynecologist!

ChesterGreySideboard · 11/02/2019 16:18

Oh lord. Is there nothing that can’t be mansplained?

Melroses · 11/02/2019 16:28

twitter.com/mauddromgoole/status/1094612574635810816

'Correctile dysfunction', apparently

Bubastes · 11/02/2019 16:32

That mansplainy man said he was going to come back today with diagrams to support his argument! Doubling down rather than saying 'oh yeah, you're right, I'm wrong'.

Njordsgrrrl · 11/02/2019 16:57

That was an awesome read. Was he also attempting to mansplain mansplaining? My head was hurting a bit there 🙄

ChesterGreySideboard · 11/02/2019 17:02

I kind of get what he claimed he meant, which is that in common parlance people do say vagina when they mean vulva.
However he should have wound his neck in rather than arguing the toss.

userschmoozer · 11/02/2019 17:04

He has a whole thread devoted to it

''I don’t consider it dumbing down. I consider the recent attempt to replace vagina with vulva as an affectation.''

Bless.

newtlover · 11/02/2019 17:56

can you link me to his thread, I need a laugh

Flip

1 2 3 4