Talk:Labiaplasty

Comment

"Labiaplasty is sometimes performed to revise anomalies and congenital conditions such as large inner labia" A large inner labia is not an anomaly or an congential condition.Spuddy 17 03:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removed external links

I removed several commercial external links. Joie de Vivre 19:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources being hosted on commercial sites doesn't disqualify them under Wikipedia policy. Sources such as before and after photos of the procedure seem to be very relevant.--Ty580 10:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number 4 in the list of Links normally to be avoided is Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. The sites I deleted exist primarily to advertise a particular surgeon's work. Therefore, they are inappropriate for the external links section. As far as the necessity of links to such images, why should one surgeon's work be featured over another? These websites don't provide comprehensive, neutral information on labiaplasty and what the results look like, they exist to sell expensive surgical procedures. Google image search can be used by anyone who wants to see such photos. Joie de Vivre 17:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct, I did not follow the guidelines. I found the videos very informative from the patients point of view, that's why I added them, but, yes, they can be Googled. LoveyK 16:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Globe link

The The Toronto Globe piece no longer exsists on the Globe’s website. The link posted is a text copy on the www.noharm.org[[1]] (National Organization to Halt the Abuse and Routine Mutilation of Males) website and only has the one page with a text copy of the Globe article refering to labiaplasty. Preceding the text copy of the Globe article is this controversial and somewhat confusing comment:

“Looking Like Mommy? Labiaplasty Dilemma”, “... If a woman has her genitals altered in this way, and then becomes pregnant with a daughter and feels that it would be in her child's best interests that the girl's genitals should "look like mommy's", would this be sufficient reason for a physician to carry out the "service" of altering the girl's genitals? ... etc,etc.”

I think the link should be removed. Please advise. LoveyK 16:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

I don't really care about this topic, so I'd like to just note people's edits are very far from complying with WP:NPOV. It's an old POV warrior strategy to attribute the opinions of article authors to the journals themselves in order to artificially bolster one's case.--Ty580 01:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed paragraph moved here

I've moved this paragraph from the controversies section to here because it's contracted by both pro and con sources. (The British Medical Journal blasts all labiaplasties, whether for quality of life or cosmetic.)--Ty580 20:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Labiaplasty evokes strong emotional responses far more often than more common procedures like rhinoplasty. There is considerable controversy surrounding such surgeries for many patients, notably around women who worry that their labia are abnormal. While plastic surgery websites state this procedure may be appropriate for women experiencing discomfort during physical activities, sexual intimacy, or from irritation caused from close-fitting garments, the controversy surrounds the phenomenon of women undergoing labiaplasty for aesthetic reasons alone^{[citation needed]}.

NPOV continued

I’ve interviewed dozens of labiaplasty patients along with surgeons who provide the procedure. In the U.S., hardly anybody is concerned about a so-called “controversy”. Primarily, patients are having labiaplasty for the three reasons cited by Ty 580, because they want it for themselves and possess the wherewithal to happily pay for it. Moreover, when done correctly, the procedure produces positive changes in women’s lives. The vast majority of labiaplasty patients would have the procedure again and unfailingly recommend it to their interested friends.

Overall, I see an extremely judgmental slant against the procedure and the women who undergo it. Moreover, the trend is not driven by clever marketing (people are not such fools) but by popular culture and the changing lifestyles of women of means. Overall, my impression is I’m reading a lecture by a stern, finger-pointing aunt, saying, “Shame, shame for being so vain.” Additionally, the references are not academic references at all but two pieces of news copy and an opinion piece by, not an expert in plastic surgery, but a seemingly alarmed psychologist and gynecologist. At least, I see nothing of the scientific method in their approach to the topic. And what does genital mutilation have to do with the topic?

Finally, any plastic surgeon in the U.S. or the U.K. worth his or her salt fully informs prospective patients about the possible risks from any surgery.

If a truly neutral entry is the object, I recommend starting from scratch. This is what we Yanks call a “hatchet piece.Charles.Downey 00:42, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sooo - my take from your above comment is; "If you can pay for it, then that's okay", yes? I have to question the whole concept of aesthetic labiaplasty in the first place, given that 1) it's a surgical procedure and 2) it's largely driven by hyped social expectation. As with any procedure, there may be complications, esp. given the location of the surgery and the proliferation of nerve endings in that region. You do acknowledge this, right? If you're concerned, mark the article {{npov}}, by all means. If you can provide good primary sources to back up your comments here - then even better - Alison ☺ 00:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, a more correct summary would be: “If you are an appropriate candidate, and can pay for it, then it’s okay.” Given that labiaplasty results are not as visible as, say, a rhinoplasty, the procedure is a fully private matter between a patient and her doctor. One thinks labiaplasty is only driven by social expectations if one lives in a nudist colony. Of course, all plastic surgery -- Botox injections included -- is surgical to one degree or another and is subject to possible risks and complications. However, labiaplasty patients suffer no more, or fewer, complications than in other plastic surgery procedures. Primary sources and references? Happy to oblige. Before-and-after pictures, too? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Charles.Downey (talk • contribs) 16:34, June 1, 2007 (UTC).

Sounds good. Make sure the images are compliant with licensing here (GFDL or CC or PD) and that the subjects are aware and are consenting. Stats and primary sources would be cool. If you'd like to paste them here, we can go for it. BTW - labiaplasty can be driven primarily by social expectation; one's labia don't have to be publically visible for one to be aware of the implications of 'incorrect' labia (as defined by ... whom?) and the imagined effect it would have on one's partner. That's the primary motivation for this and thus the comparison to rhinoplasty is just a little off. The comment, "labiaplasty patients suffer no more, or fewer, complications than in other plastic surgery procedures", I really would like to see some good evidence for. Fewer? Really? - Alison ☺ 03:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really. I'll take care of it shortly, as soon as time allows. Stay tuned.Charles.Downey 23:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]