So I was merrily eating some Tings this morning and checking my email when Baxt said:
“Good God! did you read the Sunday Style section in the Chronicle?”
Since I’m a cheapskate and I don’t subscribe to the Chronicle, I grudgingly admitted that no, I hadn’t. But the article she told me about was so very intriguing that I had to take steps, and I eventually tracked it down online. It’s called Enhanced Romance, and it’s all about how you, too, can plump up your G-Spot with collagen for the low low price of $1,850.
I mean, let’s start with the obvious physical problems here. Not much is known about the G-Spot, or how it works exactly. In fact, studies have suggested that not all women respond to G-Spot stimulation in the same way. Some feel no affect whatsoever, while others experience radically different responses across the spectrum. Lady bits are more complicated than boy bits, and they have not been studied as extensively. Messing around with them might not be the best call.
In general, I am not a fan of elective surgery around the genitalia, because of the risk of seriously mucking something up. I am definitely not a fan of inserting a needle into delicate tissue and pumping it full of collagen. Which, by the way, is reabsorbed by the body, meaning that the patient has to return every few months if she wants to keep things all, er, plumped up. According to the article, women feel more sensation as a result of the procedure, but I wonder how that will turn out in the long term. Is it possible that constant engorgement might have long term impact? And should women really be spending small fortunes on a procedure which sounds suspiciously experimental to me?
I understand the desire for corrective surgeries around the nether regions. The thought that women are repulsed by their genitalia really saddens me, but I can see how a woman with huge labia or a cavernous vagina might go for surgical correction. I wish it didn’t happen, but ultimately, it is a personal choice. But this type of surgery crosses a line for me. The FDA may have approved collagen, but I wonder how the FDA would feel about this usage? Labioplasty and other surgical procedures to standardize female bits into interchangeable parts all at least rely upon established scientific information. While I disapprove strongly of most genital plastic surgery, I do not see nearly as much potential danger. What happens if the needle slips? Or when unlicensed doctors start offering the “miracle procedure,” like this woman who killed someone with “Botox” injections?
The other issue for me was really well illustrated by one of the people interviewed in the article:
“…life’s rigmarole had left her fatigued by the end of the day, hardly in an amorous mood. Even when she felt the surge of excitement, reaching an orgasm was a time-consuming endeavor that took more effort and energy than she and her husband had to offer.”
So…the solution to a stressful, busy, unhappy life is a surgical procedure to make you come more quickly? Since this is all about pleasing your husband, not your own sexual health and pleasure? Sexual dysfunction in women is a serious issue, and I do agree that it needs to be addressed. But quickie orgasms does not really seem like a good solution to me. Getting to the bottom of the reason for decreased sex drive seems way more important. How is climaxing “just like a man” beneficial?
We live in a quick fix society which rarely bothers to delve into deeper problems. Have asthma? Take some drugs. No need to figure out what might be causing it, though. Can’t get your dick up after a day at work? Here’s a pill. Don’t like your body? Go under the knife. This article really spoke to a troubling trend, this idea that all things can be willed away with money and surgery. The Chronicle also buried a very brief counter article, perhaps out of shame at something which reads like a product advertisement, not reporting. As Betty Dodson said in the secondary article:
“‘We’ve taken a minority sexual response and made it into the latest fashion that tells women they’re not happy if they don’t have a G-spot orgasm.”
Go Betty! Not really enough to defeat the depressing message of the feature, but a small step for womankind. I really think that the Chronicle should be deeply embarrassed for publishing that article with such a weak counterpoint piece. Especially in San Francisco, alleged stronghold of sexual liberation and female independence, that sort of thing has no place in a newspaper. I notice that both articles were written by the same reporter, who just happens to be male. Interesting.
Meanwhile, the paper also includes the news of 14 soldiers dying in Iraq in the last three days, two homicides within a 12 hour period, 2,300 cyclists biking for AIDS research, and the impact of falling home prices on the San Francisco schools. Oh, and remember those soccer players who rescued a 17 year old girl who was being gang raped? Yeah, they are being threatened because of their heroic actions, according to the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department. Maybe if they had G-Shots, they wouldn’t be so upset!