Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Women's Health
Published in: BMC Women's Health 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

The contribution of online content to the promotion and normalisation of female genital cosmetic surgery: a systematic review of the literature

Authors: Hayley Mowat, Karalyn McDonald, Amy Shields Dobson, Jane Fisher, Maggie Kirkman

Published in: BMC Women's Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Women considering female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS) are likely to use the internet as a key source of information during the decision-making process. The aim of this systematic review was to determine what is known about the role of the internet in the promotion and normalisation of female genital cosmetic surgery and to identify areas for future research.

Methods

Eight social science, medical, and communication databases and Google Scholar were searched for peer-reviewed papers published in English. Results from all papers were analysed to identify recurring and unique themes.

Results

Five papers met inclusion criteria. Three of the papers reported investigations of website content of FGCS providers, a fourth compared motivations for labiaplasty publicised on provider websites with those disclosed by women in online communities, and the fifth analysed visual depictions of female genitalia in online pornography. Analysis yielded five significant and interrelated patterns of representation, each functioning to promote and normalise the practice of FGCS: pathologisation of genital diversity; female genital appearance as important to wellbeing; characteristics of women’s genitals are important for sex life; female body as degenerative and improvable through surgery; and FGCS as safe, easy, and effective. A significant gap was identified in the literature: the ways in which user-generated content might function to perpetuate, challenge, or subvert the normative discourses prevalent in online pornography and surgical websites.

Conclusions

Further research is needed to contribute to knowledge of the role played by the internet in the promotion and normalisation of female genital cosmetic surgery.
Literature
1.
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ACOG committee opinion No. 378: vaginal “rejuvenation” and cosmetic vaginal procedures. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110(3):737–8.
2.
Michala L, Liao L-M, Creighton SM. Female genital cosmetic surgery: how can clinicians act in women’s best interests? Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;14(3):203–6.
3.
4.
Renganathan A, Cartwright R, Cardozo L. Gynecological cosmetic surgery. Exp Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009;4:101–4.
5.
Crouch NS, Deans R, Michala L, Liao LM, Creighton SM. Clinical characteristics of well women seeking labial reduction surgery: a prospective study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;119(4):504–5.
6.
Bramwell R. Invisible labia: The representation of female external genitals in women’s magazines. Sexual Relation Therapy. 2002;17(2):187–90.
7.
Schick VR, Rima BN, Calabrese SK. Evulvalution: the portrayal of women’s external genitalia and physique across time and the current Barbie doll ideals. J Sex Res. 2010;48(1):74–81.
8.
Cain JM, Iglesia CB, Dickens B, Montgomery O. Body enhancement through female genital cosmetic surgery creates ethical and rights dilemmas. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2013;122(2):169–72.
9.
Johnsdotter S, Essén B. Genitals and ethnicity: the politics of genital modifications. Reprod Health Matters. 2010;18(35):29–37.PubMed
10.
Sheldon S, Wilkinson S. Female genital mutilation and cosmetic surgery: Regulating non-therapeutic body modification. Bioethics. 1998;12(4):263–85.PubMed
11.
Braun V. Female genital cosmetic surgery: a critical review of current knowledge and contemporary debates. J Women’s Health. 2010;19(7):1393–407.
12.
Reitsma W, Mourits MJE, Koning M, Pascal A, van der Lei B. No (wo)man is an island—The influence of physicians’ personal predisposition to labia minora appearance on their clinical decision making: A cross-sectional survey. J Sexual Med. 2011;8(8):2377–85.
13.
Lloyd J, Crouch NS, Minto CL, Liao LM, Creighton SM. Female genital appearance: “normality” unfolds. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;112(5):643–6.
14.
Braun V, Kitzinger C. The perfectible vagina: Size matters. Culture Health Sexual. 2001;3(3):263–77.
15.
McDougall LJ. Towards a clean slit: how medicine and notions of normality are shaping female genital aesthetics. Culture Health Sexual. 2013;15(7):774–87.
16.
Davis SW. Loose lips sink ships. Fem Stud. 2002;28(1):7–35.
17.
Tiefer L. Female genital cosmetic surgery: Freakish or inevitable? Analysis from medical marketing, bioethics, and feminist theory. Feminism Psychol. 2008;18(4):466–79.
18.
Braun V, Wilkinson S. Socio-cultural representations of the vagina. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2001;19(1):17–32.
19.
Braun V. In search of (better) sexual pleasure: female genital ‘cosmetic’ surgery. Sexualities. 2005;8(4):407–24.
20.
Wolf N. The beauty myth: How images of beauty are used against women. New York: William Morrow and Company Inc.; 1991.
21.
Sarwer DB, Cash TF, Magee L, Williams EF, Thompson JK, Roehrig M, et al. Female college students and cosmetic surgery: An investigation of experiences, attitudes, and body image. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;115(3):931–8. 910.1097/1001.PRS.0000153204.0000137065.D0000153203.PubMed
22.
Walden JL, Panagopoulous G, Shrader SW. Contemporary decision making and perception in patients undergoing cosmetic breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J. 2010;30(3):395–403.PubMed
23.
Berman L, Berman J, Felder S, Pollets D, Chhabra S, Miles M, et al. Seeking help for sexual function complaints: what gynecologists need to know about the female patient’s experience. Fertil Steril. 2003;79(3):572–6.PubMed
24.
Nappi RE, Liekens G, Brandenburg U. Attitudes, perceptions and knowledge about the vagina: the international vagina dialogue survey. Contraception. 2006;73(5):493–500.PubMed
25.
Sharp G, Tiggemann M, Mattiske J. Predictors of consideration of labiaplasty: an extension of the tripartite influence model of beauty ideals. Psychol Women Q. 2014;00:1–12. accessed September 14 2014.
26.
Michala L, Koliantzaki S, Antsaklis A. Protruding labia minora: abnormal or just uncool? J Psychosomatic Obstet Gynecol. 2011;32(3):154–6.
27.
Koning M, Zeijlmans IA, Bouman TK, van der Lei B. Female attitudes regarding labia minora appearance and reduction with consideration of media influence. Aesthet Surg J. 2009;29(1):65–71.PubMed
28.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA StatementThe PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264–9.PubMed
29.
Kmet LM, Lee RC, Cook LS: Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research, 2004.
30.
Zwier S. “What motivates Her”: motivations for considering labial reduction surgery as recounted on Women’s online communities and Surgeons’ websites. Sexual Med. 2014;2(1):16–23.
31.
Howarth H, Sommer V, Jordan FM. Visual depictions of female genitalia differ depending on source. Med Human. 2010;36(2):75–9.
32.
Liao L-M, Taghinejadi N, Creighton SM. An analysis of the content and clinical implications of online advertisements for female genital cosmetic surgery. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e001908. doi:10.​1136/​bmjopen-2012-001908.
33.
Moran C, Lee C. Selling genital cosmetic surgery to healthy women: A multimodal discourse analysis of Australian surgery websites. Critical Discourse Stud. 2013;10(4):373–91.
34.
Ashong AC, Batta HE. Sensationalising the female pudenda: an examination of public communication of aesthetic genital surgery. Global J Health Sci. 2012;5(2):153.
35.
Bartky SL. Foucault, femininity, and the modernization of patriarchal power. In: Diamond I, Quinby L, editors. Feminism and Foucault: reflections on resistance. USA: Northeastern University Press; 1997.
36.
Tincknell E. Scourging the abject body: Ten years younger and fragmented femininity under neoliberalism. In: Gill R, Scharff C, editors. New femininities: Postfeminism, neoliberalism and subjectivity. Basingstoke: Palgrave; 2011. p. 83–98.
37.
Braun V. The women are doing it for themselves’: The rhetoric of choice and agency around female genital ’cosmetic surgery. Aust Fem Stud. 2009;24(60):233–49.
38.
Woodstock L. Skin deep, soul deep: Mass mediating cosmetic surgery in popular magazines, 1968–1998. Commun Rev. 2001;4(3):421–42.
39.
Braun V. Selling the “perfect” vulva. In: Heyes CJ, Jones MR, editors. Cosmetic surgery: a feminist primer. Farnham: Ashgate; 2009. p. 133–49.
40.
Jackson S. Sexual skirmishes and feminist factions: twenty-five years of debate on women and sexuality. In: Jackson S, Scott S, editors. Feminism and sexuality: A reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1996. p. 1–31.
41.
Goodman MP. Female cosmetic genital surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(1):154–9.PubMed
42.
Iglesia C, Yurteri-Kaplan L, Alinsod R. Female genital cosmetic surgery: a review of techniques and outcomes. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(12):1997–2009.PubMed
Metadata
Title
The contribution of online content to the promotion and normalisation of female genital cosmetic surgery: a systematic review of the literature
Authors
Hayley Mowat
Karalyn McDonald
Amy Shields Dobson
Jane Fisher
Maggie Kirkman
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Women's Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6874
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-015-0271-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Women's Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Use of HIV counseling and testing and family planning services among postpartum women in Kenya: a multicentre, non-randomised trial

Research article

"You can't always get what you want": from doctrine to practicability of study designs for clinical investigation in endometriosis

Research article

“I need to terminate this pregnancy even if it will take my life”: a qualitative study of the effect of being denied legal abortion on women’s lives in Nepal

Research article

Rural women are more likely to use long acting contraceptive in Tigray region, Northern Ethiopia: a comparative community-based cross sectional study

Editorial

The role of structural and interpersonal violence in the lives of women: a conceptual shift in prevention of gender-based violence

Research article

Relationship between bone mineral density, its associated physiological factors, and tooth loss in postmenopausal Korean women