on the accessibility of cervices
yesterday in class my professor told us that early detection of cervical cancer is possible because “the cervix is so easily accessible.”
the usefulness of pap smears, cancer screenings, etc. is a topic that’s already being addressed quite eloquently over at women’s space, but what i take issue with here is the contention that women’s cervices are “easily accessible.” i understand what the instructor meant: you can’t see a testicle, ovary, lung, or other such internal organ without surgery, whereas the cervix is at the end of the vagina which opens out of the body and thus can be viewed through that cavity (like seeing the back of your throat when you open your mouth). but even so, i object to the language he used.
who, other than a man, would call the cervix “easily accessible”?! even if visualizing the cervix doesn’t require surgery, it is still invasive, it is still uncomfortable (and frequently painful!), it is still a traumatic experience for many women. maybe i’m splitting hairs over linguistics here, but i dislike the implication that accessing the cervix is no big deal. it undermines the seriousness of the experience for many, if not most, if not ALL women.
furthermore, it seems so typical of a male to present the female body, especially the sexual organs, as “easily accessible.” i mean, that’s what women are for! to spread their legs, open their labia, and let the big ol’ paternalistic man right in. no problem.
again, maybe i’m making a big deal about this. but the comment seriously bothers me, and i think it indicates a very concerning attitude towards women’s bodies and the medical experiences women have with those bodies.
and you know what? not only did he say “the cervix is so easily accessible” aloud during his lecture, it’s also printed word-for-word in the notes he made up for us to study from.
Satsuma said,
November 8, 2007 at 2:08 am
These small observations reveal larger truths. So thanks for this report!
It was well written and very creepy to read. The male mind in the medical profession has a very long way to go. Do you find a better understanding among the women medical school professors?
ladoctorita said,
November 8, 2007 at 4:58 pm
hi satsuma, thanks for checking out my blog and taking the time to comment!
it’s true that patriarchical, paternalistic attitudes still prevail in health care and in medical education. i try to document much of what i encounter here on my blog, but there’s a lot more that i haven’t written about yet . . . misogynistic jokes in class, backhanded comments about the female body, etc. so it’s very true that the institution of health care, and the male mind within it, have a long way to go.
as far as differences between the male and female medical school professors . . . i’ve found that if i point out certain issues, such as the pathologizing of female anatomy that i mentioned in a previous post, to female instructors they will acknowledge them and frequently agree with me, but overall i haven’t found the women professors to be particularly feminist in their own right. i think that medical education (and the health care institution as a whole) is so structured that it doesn’t permit a lot of truly radical figures within it. during the school year i’m hoping to organize some events that address the issues of women in the medical profession and in the context of medical care, which i hope will start some dialogue and put me in touch with some more feminist-minded female doctors. we’ll see how it goes.
also, i love your statement that “small observations reveal larger truths.” i think when i bring up these linguistic issues about how women’s bodies are described in medicine, many people see it as splitting hairs, without realizing that those details carry significant implications.
Seventh Carnival of Radical Feminists « Carnival of Radical Feminists said,
December 14, 2007 at 5:29 pm
[...] La Doctorita on sexism in her med school classes. [...]