“The only acceptable vagina as far as the Classification Board is concerned is one that is ‘neat and tidy’ in their eye.
They basically consider the labia minora ‘too offensive’ for soft porn.”
Brad Boxall, Former Editor Picture Magazine
9 February 2010
I am indebted to Rachodactylus for drawing my attention to this clip which explains the effect of the Classification authority’s guidelines on female body dysmorphia in Australia.
Basically, any model whose genital flesh shows outside the ‘single crease’ has to have her girlie bits ‘doctored’ by the airbrushes of the graphic artists in order to be featured in nude magazines in Australia. And, according to their editors, this is solely to conform to the guidelines of the Classification Board.
The result being that more and more women believed that their own vaginas were malformed if the inner lips protruded in any way, leading to a marked increase in requests for vaginal cosmetic surgery.
Labiaplasty surgery involves cutting back the ‘frilly’ skin of the labia minora so that it remains inside the labia majora, effectively neatening and making the whole area uniform. According to Wikipedia: “As recently as 1999, surgeons usually performed labium reduction by straight amputation of the protuberant sections and then by suturing the edges together. However, this procedure sometimes created a fragile and stiff suture line as well as eliminating the natural contour and pigmentation of the labia minora. Moreover, other procedural and clinical problems existed with amputation that did not ensure a favorable outcome.
Several years later, more surgeons introduced lasers into their armamentarium and began using more refined surgical procedures, such as inferior wedge resection and superior pedicle flap reconstruction. In one outcome study, surgeons studied the results of 20 patients undergoing labiaplasty via the procedure. 95.2 percent of patients at 46 months reported being very satisfied. While five complications cropped up, all but one were handled immediately postoperatively and did not require additional hospital stays or interfere with healing.
Labiaplasty is almost always an outpatient procedure performed under anesthesia. It is debated as to whether a local or short general anesthetic delivers better patient comfort. After surgery, patients may experience some mild discomfort and variable swelling, which usually disappear for the most part after one to two weeks. Recovery times ranging from three days to two weeks are claimed on surgeons’ websites.”
Just watching the video is such an education about the huge variety of sizes, shapes and formations that make up the female genitalia. And the knowledge that the images of those perfect women depicted in porn magazines have actually been specifically altered is an encouraging revelation for the rest of us wannabees.
It’s just so terribly sad that these rulings are responsible for a widespread female perception that many perfectly formed versions of the vagina are somehow abnormal and nasty, requiring surgical intervention to cure/heal them.
And the Australian censors are not alone. This seems to be almost a world-wide policy. How many pictures/porn films have you seen where the labia minora are not perfectly symmetrical and aesthetically neat and tidy?
With my own body dysmorphia and cuntphobia issues, I can’t help feeling aggrieved that I too might have been heavily influenced by the images that I have seen in the UK media and online, even though my own ‘bits’ do actually fall within the censor’s guidelines. See my attempt to clone my pussy. Yet again, my anorexic ability to ‘not see’ what is actually there beggars belief.
Since virtually every man I have ever spoken to on the subject expresses the view that he is just grateful to be allowed in the general vicinity of a lady’s vagina and doesn’t really care about such extraneous details, it seems quite bizarre that a group of individuals from around the world should be allowed to make such a unilateral decision in an attempt to preserve some bizarre ‘public decency’ requirement.
It makes you wonder if these Classification Boards are comprised totally of men. Surely any woman would not have agreed to such a misguided set of rules? And are there such dictatorial guidelines for the male genitalia in female publications? Should we, as women, feel offended by a scrotal sac that is lop-sided or any veins that might not be symmetrical? Perhaps we should be demanding that all erections in the public domain be artificially doctored so that they appear perpendicular and without any deviation to left or right?
We don’t because, not only would that would be silly, but each penis has its own idiosyncratic personality, just like its owner, who would consider it a personal affront to have his masculinity demeaned by such interference.
So why is it deemed any different for the female gender? Are we partly to blame for allowing it? I can recall on a UK programme that I watched about this issue, some young girls having labiaplasties because their classmates and close friends/family members had laughed at their exposed inner labia. Pointed and whispered and made them feel abnormal. Whilst it’s not a body part that I deliberately waved in the direction of my own close friends in the showers after PE – so I was a little distracted as to how this had come about – it still seems rather an odd admission. Although, perhaps she was just too embarrassed to say that those friends were male, since it might be considered a reflection on her morals.
But it goes to prove that our teenagers have also been affected by what they have seen on the internet and in magazines. Any deviation from what is considered ‘the norm’ is to be marked as unusual and mocked to such a degree that surgery is enlisted to make ‘life worth living’.
These ridiculous rules have an awful lot of women’s body ‘issues’ to answer for.