#women’s bodies

[haggishlyhagging]

To a surprising degree, healthcare today still focuses on aspects of the science that were adopted during the witch-hunts: the spirit of aggressive domination and the hatred of women; belief in the omnipotence of science and of those who exercise it, but also in the separation of body and mind, and in a cold rationalism, shorn of all emotion. To begin with, the medical realm tends to perpetuate the impulse to dominate and subjugate, the beginnings of which Carolyn Merchant plots out in her book. And sometimes this is taken to cartoonish lengths: in December 2017, a British surgeon was tried for lasering his initials onto the livers of two patients during organ-transplant operations. And this attitude can be at its worst in practice on female patients. First, as Florence Montreynaud notes, "Women's organs are mapped out with men's names," like flags affixed to various parts of our anatomy. She explains:

“The canals connecting each ovary to the uterus were, until 1997, known as the Fallopian Tubes, after the Italian surgeon who first described them in detail in the sixteenth century—before they became the uterine tubes. The little sacs inside the ovaries where, between puberty and the menopause, an ovocyte matures every month are the Graafian follicles, named after Regnier de Graaf, a Dutch doctor in the seventeenth century. The glands that secrete liquid moistening the vulva and vaginal opening are called Bartholin's glands, after the seventeenth-century Danish anatomist. Worse still, in the twentieth century a pleasure zone within the vagina was given the appellation the ‘G-spot,’ celebrating the initial of the German doctor Ernst Grägenberg.

“Imagine the equivalent for men: Garrett Ander-son's corpus cavernosum or J. C. Wright's canals . . .”

Men's stranglehold on the profession is far from a broadly abstract force, either. The world of healthcare—especially when it comes to gynecology and reproductive rights—seems keen to exercise ongoing control over women's bodies and to ensure its own unlimited access to them. As if in never-ending reiteration of the joint project of taming nature and women, it seems these bodies must always be reduced to passivity, to ensure their obedience. For example, Martin Winckler questions why, in France, the annual gynecological check-up is considered an "immutable ritual," a "sacred obligation," from puberty onward, even if were in perfect health. According to Winkler, there is no justification for this practice.

“The idea that we must undergo ‘from the onset of sexual activity, and then every year’ a gynecological exam, a breast exam and a smear test ‘so as not to miss anything’ (i.e., in order not to miss a cervical, ovarian or breast cancer) is medically unsubstantiated, especially for women younger than thirty, among whom cancers are very rare and, in any case and as a rule, tend not to be discovered in generalist check-ups. And then, a year later, if the patient is doing well, the doctor can renew her contraceptive prescription without examining her! Why? It's quite simple: if the woman is feeling well, the likelihood that the doctor will find ‘something’ is almost nil. Then, frankly, why harass her about the check-up in the first place?”

Why indeed? This ritual turns out to have some grim stories associated with it. Winckler recounts the case of two adolescents whose doctor (also the mayor of their local authority) insisted on a gynecological and breast exam every three months. But the point of the institution, whether annual or more frequent, appears to be ideological more than anything else: it's about maintaining surveillance of women's bodies. Blogger and journalist Marie-Hélène Lahaye notes the eloquent title of a French obstetricians and gynecologists newsletter which, in June 2016, opposed widening the remit of independent midwives: the doctors denounced measures that would damage women's "medical surveillance . . ." For Mary Daly, this ritual perpetuates a state of anxiety in women from all walks of society—a situation comparable to that born of the pressures of beauty conventions— and constitutes a substantial drain on their resources.

Many doctors are so sure of their rights that they can cross the line into illegality without even noticing. In 2015, an internal note sent out by the South Lyon medical faculty inviting its gynecology students to practice vaginal examinations on patients sedated for operations was picked up online. On social media, as Marie-Hélène Lahaye reports, numerous doctors and students were offended by reminders that every medical action requires the patient's consent and that the introduction of fingers into the vagina meets the legal definition of rape. Some of them protested that there was "nothing sexual" in the practice and that they took "no pleasure at all" in it, thereby offering a brand-new and daring revision to the definition of rape. Others jumped from frying pan to fire by arguing that, if they were to respect procedure and request the patients' authorization, the latter might well refuse it. After reading and hearing from these quarters that vaginal and rectal exams were neutral acts without any sexual aspect, Lahaye suggested on Twitter that, in this case, the medical students could train in this work by practicing on each other: "I admit this was not received with wild enthusiasm."

Another problematic ritual: the parade of medical personnel who show up when a woman is in the midst of giving birth and each in turn insert two fingers into her vagina to assess her cervical dilation, without requesting consent nor even informing her beforehand, and sometimes without being overly gentle either. Lahaye invites us to imagine the equivalent for other body parts: you are at the dentist and, at regular intervals, unfamiliar people come into the room and insert their fingers into your mouth; or you are seeing a specialist for a rectal exam and a dozen people take turns putting their finger into your anus . . . "Such a practice," Lahaye concludes, "is inconceivable in any of the medical disciplines except obstetrics, the one that's all about access to women's genitals." We see here, in an extreme form, the assumption that women's bodies belong to everyone but themselves, which is found to differing degrees throughout society and explains why we are not expected to kick up a fuss over the odd pat on the bottom.

-Mona Chollet, In Defense of Witches: The Legacy of the Witch Hunts and Why Women are Still on Trial

[madalice31]

Mmmm now I’m triggered lol.

Halle Bailey did not gaslight anyone. It’s not gaslighting when one, you don’t have any relationship with this person, platonic or otherwise, not even a conversation. So exactly how did she gaslight you? What she did was not acknowledge the fact that she was pregnant…to the public. It’s not like she was lying to the people closest to her about being pregnant. And not once did she deny being pregnant! She may have jugged on or ignored a lot of yall’s questions, but she had every right to do that if she didn’t want to share the experience with the public. Let’s not start this narrative that she was “gaslighting” cause yall don’t know how to not project your own shit on other people. Even Chloe never denied it, she just said yall stop gossiping about my sister! As she should have. Period. Halle was never the problem.

It was obvious. She knew it was obvious. People caught on, and she even straight up got caught with those hoodie pics. But you know what, she continued to keep that shit to herself because she ain’t want to talk about it with yall! And guess what, she wasn’t obligated nor required to talk to yall or acknowledge anything.

I’m getting irritated at the comments. “She so weird, why talk about it now? Oh she just didn’t want to be looked at as a baby mama. Oh she was tryna to maintain her Disney image.” Blah, blah, blah. Y’all will never know what her reasons were unless she decides to share that. Speculate all you want. But a woman has the right to be like, hey I don’t want to share my actual pregnancy experience with you guys. I don’t want to be asked questions in interviews. I don’t want yall judgement cause I’m not married or I’m too young in your eyes. I don’t want to deal with yall being all in my business. So no, you don’t get to see me pregnant. No, I’m not gonna answer questions about it. Yes I will sit in this poofy ass dress with my legs crossed, knowing you can tell, but talking to you about everything else BUT. You think this press tour, people didn’t know? All these interviews, people didn’t know? Her team kept that shit on lock and made sure everyone kept their mouths shut! Kudos to them!

A woman also has the right to say, now that my child is here, I’m willing to share more. I’m going to acknowledge my child. And y’all still ain’t gonna get every bit of info, but y’all can stop talking now. Like y’all done done now?

Nothing wrong with that. Nothing weird about that. Hence why in her caption she says the world was “desperate” to meet him. Cause folks was hella pressed.

Now do I have some opinions on who with and why now, yes I do. Do I have some opinions about the black community and baby mama/baby daddy culture, yes I do.

But that’s neither here nor there. The point is she didn’t owe us shit! So let’s stop throwing around words like “gaslighting” when it comes to people that haven’t even had a conversation with us, and most likely NEVER WILL.

If you asked her in person if she was pregnant and she told you no, that’s still not gaslighting lol. Cause if you come back and say oh so you were pregnant, you lied. The response? Yes, I did lie. Because I didn’t feel like sharing that with you at the time. But now, yeah, obviously I was pregnant. Last I checked, a lot of your mothers, daughters, aunties, and cousins have done the same. For whatever their reasons, they have done the same. You’ve kept secrets for them. So how is this any different? Just cause she a celebrity yall feel so entitled and it’s ridiculous.

I blame it on the celebrities who do that shit tho. Who think they need to share everything, like that’s normal. Even to the point of announcing divorces and break ups. Like celebrity divorce announcements have always been the dumbest shit to me. Like I give a fuck about your shit relationship ending. Why is that shit on CNN? We talk more these days about their personal lives than their actual projects and creative endeavors. These days, the people are more so the commodity, versus what they actually sell, create, or provide and it’s sad. Anyway, I digress.

Can I just say this before I leave? If we gonna give Rihanna praise for changing the maternity game, and showing us how to style a pregnant belly on full display. Let’s give Halle credit for showing us how to style a pregnant belly you don’t want to showcase or flaunt, but still look stylish and sexy. Cause every outfit and dress she wore throughout her whole pregnancy was spot fucking on! Her stylist understood the assignment!

[sick-sad-world-revolution-now]

*Sees and follow Instagram account of a very active black woman who calls herself a radical feminist and who talk about the intersection of sexism and racism* : 😃😃

*Is disappointed because behind her criticism of gender hides homophobia, being anti formula (???) and some traditional ideas*

Anyway, radical feminism is left wing, doesn’t demonise women for not wanting to breastfeed their babies nor propagate the idea that LGB people are imposing themselves on history or acting like they have an agenda. Straight people do better and don’t act like you’re edgy when you don’t have the best interests of women and same-sex attracted ppl in mind.

[lenbryant]

Morality is out there.

[indizombie]

Dr Singh says women are “fair game” to perpetrators. Women’s bodies are seen as public property. People think they can comment on how thin or fat you are, whether your skirt is too short, choose to get married or not, enjoy sex or not, have children or not.” The female body is seen as a public space. As a result, Dr Singh says, “Men feel free to flash women in a park, violate and kill with impunity. Women can be controlled and punished for being too much or too little. Whatever we see at the micro and macro levels mirrors one another. Intersections are worse if you’re poor, single, or dependent. Gabriella Raphael was a single mother, possibly at the lower end of the income scale or influence, which can account for the lack of interest in bringing her perpetrators to justice.”

Ira Mathur, ‘Why can’t her body be hers?’, Trinidad Guardian

[sailor-hufflepuff]

Literally mentioned a pcos diagnosis and the doctor went on a fifteen minute rant about how it’s not a real thing, and if women just lost weight they’d be fine.

I was eventually able to break in and point out that my diagnosis was actually given when I was the “ideal” weight for my height and body frame, and the obesity came later as a side affect of medications I’m on for a separate issue completely.

Never seen a grown man backpedal so fast. He wrote all the prescriptions I asked for and ordered the tests I wanted without question, so it’s fine.

Still annoying.

no clue what causes pcos. no clue what causes endometriosis. 2 year waiting lists to see a gynecologist. you'd think female bodies only started existing 50 years ago

[jonny-tozzyn]

[sick-sad-world-revolution-now]

New womanhood experience has dropped: washing your period panties in a basin/sink and contemplating the red water, enjoying the sight of bloody hands

[aphrodidadotcom]

Follow @aphrodidadotcom for more beautiful women, join our email list at aphrodida.com To keep up to date with our original content

[singledigitsalary]

[freakmodesworld]

[jonny-tozzyn]

[blondeheaven]

Dressed to thrill