Some time ago I was having lunch with several work colleagues, all women, who were discussing an online survey they had filled out in relation to women’s genital body image. Later that afternoon I filled out the survey myself. I must say I wasn’t used to thinking about how much I liked or disliked my genitalia and I certainly couldn’t remember the last time I had spoken with anybody about women’s thoughts and feelings about their vaginas, clitorises or vulvas. I told a friend about the survey and asked her what she thought about her own genitalia. She uncomfortably suggested that she was fine with it, as long as her boyfriend didn’t get “too close and personal”. I wondered what could possibly be so confronting, but left the conversation there.

As I often like to do in order to gauge how much information is available on a particular topic, I searched several databases for articles on women’s genitalia written from a sociological approach. I found plenty of biological, medical and anatomical research on women’s genitals. In a sociological database, many of the articles referred to female circumcision, or surgical correction (mainly cosmetic) of women’s external genitalia. The closest I came to finding anything on the social and historical construction of women’s genital body image was reference to Aristotle’s theory that female genitalia was an imperfect ‘inward’ version of the perfect ‘outward’ male organ. Overall, I got the sense that not only have women’s genitals been historically constructed as ‘imperfect’; clearly many people still feel the need to ‘fix’ something that is apparently wrong.

I had reason to consider this further a few weeks ago when a workmate forwarded me a funny email with advertising images from the 1930s. One of these images was an advertisement for Lysol, a brand of disinfectant. Since the text in the image is hard to read, I have printed it below.

“Held in a web of indifference…”

Day after heartbreaking day I was held in an unyielding web…a web spun by my husband’s indifference. I couldn’t reach him anymore! Was the fault mine? Well…thinking you know about feminine hygiene, yet trusting to now-and-then care, can make all the difference in married happiness, as my doctor pointed out. He said never to run such careless risks…prescribed “Lysol” brand disinfectant for douching – always.

“But I broke through it!”

Oh, the joy of finding Tom’s love and close companionship once more! Believe me, I follow to the letter my doctor’s advice on feminine hygiene…always use “Lysol” for douching. I wouldn’t be satisfied now with salt, soda or other homemade solutions! Not with “Lysol,” a proved germ-killer that cleanses so gently yet so thoroughly. It’s easy to use, too, and economical. The very best part is – “Lysol” really works.

At first I laughed and asked myself, why would anybody want to douche with disinfectant? I was also amazed at the way in which rigorous “feminine hygiene” was portrayed as central to women’s ability to please their husbands and maintain happy marriages. I found a more recent advertisement (from 1969) that evoked similar imagery in relation to the use of feminine hygiene deodorant to deal with “worry-making odors”.

“Starting today, why not make Pristeen as much a part of your daily life as your bath or shower. It’s just as essential to your cleanliness. And to your peace of mind about being a girl. An attractive, nice-to-be-with girl.”

In another Lysol advertisement I came across, feminine hygiene was linked to women’s ability to be good mothers! A section of the advertisement reads:

“Just being a mother is a job with twenty-four hour shifts seven days a week. There are some mothers who succeed so well in this difficult task that their children are happy and contented, proud of their homes, always glad to be there and to bring in their friends.

It is a magic quality in motherhood that works this spell. Always you find in these households a woman who has charm, gentleness, poise, and a certain untiring vitality which comes from knowing how to take care of herself.”

The advertisement follows on with the importance of douching with Lysol in order to embrace these feminine, maternal qualities.

I flippantly passed these advertisements off as outdated, patriarchal, and typical of that era. Surely, the imagery of dirty, malodorous, and germ-ridden vaginas was a thing of the past. After some more thought, I sadly realised that we have not come all that far in the 70 years since the “joy” of Lysol’s contribution to “feminine hygiene”. Doctors no longer suggest that women use douches and deodorisers due to evidence that suggests that these products can lead to infection and disease. However, according to an article in a medical journal, 67 million women in the United States still practice vaginal douching and I’m willing to bet that many women in other countries also continue these practices. A quick search of the internet revealed advertisements for a vast number of products that promise to ‘deodorise’, ‘freshen’, and ‘cleanse’. I could not find any contemporary imagery approximating a woman being freed from a spider web into the arms of an adoring husband. Nevertheless, I found a variety of women’s testimonies that were not too far off the mark. Consider the following statements.

"I would go to the Doctor who would say nothing was wrong with me every time. I started to think “Oh well, I guess I just have to deal with the odor...” I saw an ad for RepHresh. This was a God send...my sex life with my husband has improved 100%."

"Words can't even begin to explain the relief I feel. No more sprays, scented panty liners, douches, and whatever else there is out there. My sex life is back on track and so is my marriage!"

According to these testimonies, then, using these products will lead to better sex and better relationships. Clearly, not that much has changed.

This control of women’s sexuality by tampering with, and sometimes eliminating, natural bodily functions has occurred, and continues to occur, across myriad historical and cultural contexts. One example that comes to mind is the use of vaginal drying agents, widespread in sub-Saharan Africa and in some countries in the Caribbean and in Central America. According to Kun (1998) vaginal drying consists of placing certain objects or substances into the vagina to remove lubrication and, thus, to create more friction and tightness during sexual intercourse. In some contexts vaginal drying is also related to cultural beliefs surrounding women’s sexual morality; for instance, beliefs that a woman’s lubrication indicates infidelity. There is evidence to suggest that vaginal drying may lead to elevated risk of vaginal infection, and STI and HIV infection, due to irritation and inflammation.

Returning to the issue of genital body image and feminine hygiene, it is not so surprising that it is a cause of concern for women given that, across time and place, their genitalia have been so closely connected to moral discourses that dictate what it means to be a ‘good’ woman, wife, mother, and lover. Far from being held in a “web of indifference”, women appear to be caught in a web of moral imperatives that not only constructs their sexuality as imperfect, but that can also be highly damaging to their physical and sexual health.

Attachment	Size	Type
lysol_web of indifference.jpg	82.19 KB	PJPEG
lysol_motherhood.jpg	548.59 KB	PJPEG
pristeen.jpg	58.9 KB	PJPEG