Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Say goodbye to your pudendum

76 replies

MsAmerica · 06/10/2021 01:59

Taking the ‘Shame Part’ Out of Female Anatomy
Anatomists have bid farewell to “pudendum"
By Rachel E. Gross

In the beginning, shame knew no sex. First-century Roman writers used “pudendum” to mean the genitals of men, women and animals. But it was women to whom the shame stuck.

In 1543, the word made an appearance alongside an odd illustration in an anatomical atlas by Andreas Vesalius, a Flemish physician sometimes called the “father of modern anatomy.” The image, although labeled a human uterus, looks unmistakably like a penis, but with a tuft of curly pubic hair near the head, reflecting the idea that women were just men with imperfect, internal body parts. (Also, recall the dearth of female corpses.)

A century later, a Dutch anatomist named Regnier de Graaf highlighted the role of the clitoris in female sexuality. “If these parts of the pudendum had not been endowed with such an exquisite sensitivity to pleasure,” he wrote, “no woman would be willing to take upon herself the irksome nine-months-long business of gestation, the painful and often fatal process of expelling the fetus, and the worrisome and care-ridden task of raising children.”

www.nytimes.com/2021/09/21/science/pudendum-women-anatomy.html

indianexpress.com/article/technology/science/shame-part-female-anatomy-pudendum-7526800/

OP posts:
NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 21:03

@Thulian

The fact the word vagina is from Latin for 'sheath'. A widely used word. Essentially meaning it's a place for men to put their penis inside.

That seems worse? I mean if we're changing words now.

But... that is at least one function of the vagina isn't it? It's a sex organ, for having sex and getting the sperm some of the way to the egg. As well as for giving birth. Of course you don't have to use it for those things but it's not the same kind of wrong as a word that means "shameful".

I agree that trying to get rid of all words with dodgy roots is annoying, but we do get rid of some over time for good reasons.

One that always makes me cringe is "denigrate" yet no one in public life ever seems to mind using it. In that case it may not have a racist origin but it sounds like it does, which is kind of worse.

And yet, it's the word meaning sheath IE orifice for a cock that is the one used.

And I also find the idea that my vagina has a 'function' as a hole for a cock rather unpleasant.

It feels close somehow to the idea that the point of women is to be fucked by men.

And all the the things to name it. The vaginas of babies and prepubescent girls don't have a function of being fucked with a cock. In maturity there are a number of changes that are important so that the risk of catching infections is reduced. And the fact that young children and babies will be injured, they are small.

To argue that to name the orifice by reference to being fucked by a man. For all girls and babies and elderly women everywhere. Is to only see it through the male view- a sexualised cock centred view.

Incidentally I have no actual problem with the word. It doesn't make me angry. I don't want to change it. And to change it would mean everyone bring confused, rewriting loads of biology books etc.

I only raised it as if words for our anatomy have connotations that could be candidates for writing pieces about like the one in the OP. Pudenda- not in common use, can't imagine many people have even heard it. Is a strange choice to get worked up about.

Other options could be-

Geriatric mother
Incompetent cervix
Failure to progress
... Etc

Porcupineintherough · 06/10/2021 21:43

Hmm The sole purpose of a vagina is to provide a receptacle for a penis during copulation. That's it, that's its function, what it's designed for. The fact that it isnt for use in juveniles makes no difference - the uterus is for growing babies and girls dont do that either before puberty. You dont have to like it, its just biology.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 21:48

The vagina's sole function is in no way for being fucked with a cock.

Jesus Christ! Are you serious?

I think you need to look into all the other things a vagina does!

I mean unless you're taking the view that our whole reproductive biology is like it is because babies. Which is fair. But in the context of our female bodies. There are many functions. Just for fucking with a dick.

Crikey.

Porcupineintherough · 06/10/2021 21:56

So tell me these other functions? Do you really think a vagina would have evolved the way it has if conception wasnt via penis?

Porcupineintherough · 06/10/2021 22:00

Unless you are taking the view that our whole reproductive biology is like it is because babies

Yes of course I am. Because it is.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 22:18

Your point was that given the vagina has the sole function of being fucked with a cock.

I think you're using a slightly unusual way of looking at functions of organs.

I think you are only considering the reason they exist in the first place.

Rather than what I would have thought was the more usual usage- given things exist. What things to they do?

By your definition surely what are the functions of the mouth.

You would say to eat and drink.

I would say to something like. Eating, part of expressing feelings, to vocalise sounds including for humans speech, etc.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 22:21

In a biology test, if the question was, what are the functions of the human vagina.

And you answered, the only function is to be penetrated by a penis.

Do you think that would get you a good mark?

Porcupineintherough · 06/10/2021 22:29

@NiceGerbil I ask you again, what are these other functions? The vagina is an amazing organ but it is designed for sex. Everything it is and does is related to the fact that it is a place for penile penetration and ejaculation. That doesnt make it lesser, it provides a whole host of benefits. But that's what its for.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 22:35

I think you are pursuing this line because your view that our vaginas sole function is to be fucked by a cock is a statement you will reconsider.

Even if looking at the vagina only existing due to being a part of female reproductive biology.

Then surely the vagina also has important functions during childbirth and menstruation.

The assertion that it's sole function is to get fucked by a man. Because babies biology. And therefore calling it cock-sheath. So relating it to cock. Rather than having its own word that isn't referencing men. Is aok.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 22:41

Hmmm.

Penis etymology below. Just been having a look.

Most sites say derived Latin for tall.

According to you that's nonsensical. It should mean something to do with peeing and housed by a vagina.

Obviously. It's really weird that it has it's own word that is not defining it in relation to a vagina isn't it 🤔

'Etymology
From Proto-Italic pesnis, from Proto-Indo-European pes-ni-s. Cognate with Ancient Greek πέος (péos), Sanskrit पसस् (pásas), Old English fæsl.

Pronunciation
(Classical) IPA(key): /ˈpeː.nis/, [ˈpeːnɪs̠]
(Ecclesiastical) IPA(key): /ˈpe.nis/, [ˈpɛːnis]
Noun
pēnis m (genitive pēnis); third declension

(archaic) tail
(anatomy) the penis, male sexual organ
(figuratively) lust
genitive singular of pēnis
vocative singular of pēnis'

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 22:42

'I think you are pursuing this line because your view that our vaginas sole function is to be fucked by a cock is a statement you will NOT reconsider.

oops.

Porcupineintherough · 06/10/2021 22:45

What important functions does the vagina have during menstruation and childbirth. It handles both those things admirably because it has to but if there were no penile sex then it wouldn't be necessary for either to occur, indeed you could argue that both eould be easier without the vagina or at least with a radically redesigned one.

Its interesting to note your repeated use of "fucked by a cock". That's an emotive and ideologically driven phrasing whereas I'm talking as a biologist about biology. But our bodies are just that, biology, designed by the great engine of evolution for the purpose of shifting genetic material through time.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 23:03

You are a biologist? Gawd.

Women do not inevitably have PIV sex in their lives.
If they do even with no protection there is a good chance of no pregnancy resulting.

Meanwhile if a woman is pregnant. Before CS, it ALWAYS is fundamental in birthing the baby.

Yes it's sole function is the fucking bit?

You're really not convincing me in any way. Don't know about anything else.

As a biologist, you learnt that the SOLE function of a vagina is to be penetrated with a penis? Exam what are the functions of vagina. For dick would get you full marks? Come on.

Shedbuilder · 06/10/2021 23:15

@NiceGerbil

You are a biologist? Gawd.

Women do not inevitably have PIV sex in their lives.
If they do even with no protection there is a good chance of no pregnancy resulting.

Meanwhile if a woman is pregnant. Before CS, it ALWAYS is fundamental in birthing the baby.

Yes it's sole function is the fucking bit?

You're really not convincing me in any way. Don't know about anything else.

As a biologist, you learnt that the SOLE function of a vagina is to be penetrated with a penis? Exam what are the functions of vagina. For dick would get you full marks? Come on.

No, but they are designed for PIV sex because that's the way our species procreates. We're mammals, we're not octopuses.

Just because some women don't have PIV sex doesn't mean that's not what we're designed for.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 23:29

You support the idea that the SOLE FUNCTION of the vagina is for dick.

That the functions during childbirth and menstruation are not functions of the vagina.

Which leads to the idea that if it didnt perform those functions at all, that would be fine. Because the vagina only has ONE function- penetration.

Porcupineintherough · 06/10/2021 23:30

@NiceGerbil look at it this way, if conception didnt start with sexual intercourse as we know it - if sperm floated through the air like pollen, or were packaged up and passed to the woman by mandibles, would we have a vagina and would it have the form it had now? Possibly not and definitely not. Neither would the penis exist in its current form.

I really don't see why that's a controversial, it really shouldn't be. Some people are blind, it doesnt mean that eyes arent designed for seeing. Some people will never have sex, doesnt mean their uterus isnt designed to carry a baby, or their testes to produce sperm.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 23:31

Fascinating.

By the way if you Google functions of human vagina. I wanted to see if in fact biology/ medical sites did indeed give one sole function. Strangely. I didn't see one that had only one sole function- penetration. Funny that.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 23:36

[quote Porcupineintherough]@NiceGerbil look at it this way, if conception didnt start with sexual intercourse as we know it - if sperm floated through the air like pollen, or were packaged up and passed to the woman by mandibles, would we have a vagina and would it have the form it had now? Possibly not and definitely not. Neither would the penis exist in its current form.

I really don't see why that's a controversial, it really shouldn't be. Some people are blind, it doesnt mean that eyes arent designed for seeing. Some people will never have sex, doesnt mean their uterus isnt designed to carry a baby, or their testes to produce sperm.[/quote]
And on and on.

If we conceived via pollen and the rest of our reproductive biology worked the same. We would still need a way for the baby to get out Hmm

Trying to argue that the vagina has ONLY ONE - SOLE - function by imagining humans reproducing via pollen.... I mean... It's a pretty pointless way to argue the ridiculous statement that the human vagina has only one function.

It just doesn't.

To insist that getting sperm in is all its for because reproduction, but dispute that getting the baby out is a function at all. Is very peculiar.

NiceGerbil · 06/10/2021 23:39

And remembering that this whole thing started to argue that it was only right and sensible to name that body part only in relation to the penis being inside it.

XiXimXerJinping · 06/10/2021 23:51

A baby exits via the vagina but it's a shit exit! It's needlessly tight, long and orientated the wrong way for the baby!

Hmmm... I wonder why it is the way it is 🙄

NiceGerbil · 07/10/2021 00:33

Ah I know that one!

royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2014.0063

When it says birth canal it means cervix, vagina and vulva by the way Shock

Essentially the female anatomy including vagina has evolved over time due to walking upright, and increasing head size (bigger brains).

The vagina has evolved in ways to do with things other than to fit a dick? Good lord. Someone call the biologists! They need to know.

Excerpt-

'
You have access
Check for updates on crossmark
Review article
The evolution of the human pelvis: changing adaptations to bipedalism, obstetrics and thermoregulation
Laura Tobias Gruss and Daniel Schmitt
Published:05 March 2015doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0063
Abstract
The fossil record of the human pelvis reveals the selective priorities acting on hominin anatomy at different points in our evolutionary history, during which mechanical requirements for locomotion, childbirth and thermoregulation often conflicted. In our earliest upright ancestors, fundamental alterations of the pelvis compared with non-human primates facilitated bipedal walking. Further changes early in hominin evolution produced a platypelloid birth canal in a pelvis that was wide overall, with flaring ilia. This pelvic form was maintained over 3–4 Myr with only moderate changes in response to greater habitat diversity, changes in locomotor behaviour and increases in brain size. It was not until Homo sapiens evolved in Africa and the Middle East 200 000 years ago that the narrow anatomically modern pelvis with a more circular birth canal emerged. This major change appears to reflect selective pressures for further increases in neonatal brain size and for a narrow body shape associated with heat dissipation in warm environments. The advent of the modern birth canal, the shape and alignment of which require fetal rotation during birth, allowed the earliest members of our species to deal obstetrically with increases in encephalization while maintaining a narrow body to meet thermoregulatory demands and enhance locomotor performance.'

Porcupineintherough · 07/10/2021 08:05

Yeah, that really doesnt support your arguement . Anyway, good to know that yet another branch of ideology wants to subvert biology for its own ends, not like weve not encountered that before...

thinkingaboutLangCleg · 07/10/2021 08:38

It was not until Homo sapiens evolved in Africa and the Middle East 200 000 years ago that the narrow anatomically modern pelvis with a more circular birth canal emerged. This major change appears to reflect selective pressures for further increases in neonatal brain size and for a narrow body shape associated with heat dissipation in warm environments.…

Mumsnet really is an education! I learn things here every day.

NiceGerbil · 07/10/2021 22:41

Porcupine ?

What doesn't support my argument?

My 'argument' (my just obviously correct statement) that human vaginas. Do not have one SOLE function.

You have said that.

It's no problem to refer to that body part by naming it place for cock to go. To fuck. Because that is it's sole function.

You dispute that the role (function surely) of the vagina in childbirth is even a function of the vagina at all!

You state as a biologist that you know that the vagina has one sole function and literally that's all it does.

Etc. All stuff which is just. ????

And you go down this route because you didn't agree with me saying that the fact the word vagina comes from sheath... Is well. A tad more obvious than the complaint about pudenda in OP link. But also that I don't want it changed and it doesn't piss me off or anything!

NiceGerbil · 07/10/2021 22:45

@Porcupineintherough

Yeah, that really doesnt support your arguement . Anyway, good to know that yet another branch of ideology wants to subvert biology for its own ends, not like weve not encountered that before...
That would be the one that states that biologists know that the human vagina has one SOLE function. FACT!

No, they really don't because it's just incorrect.

Did you even read the link? It was because you said something about vagina only evolving to be a sheath.

It's fairly common knowledge that evolved to take into account the changes in walking upright and bigger heads.

I'm not the one who makes obviously incorrect claims as an expert in the field am I...