THE HAPPY FEMINIST DISCRIMINATES

In most areas of life, I strive to be scrupulously gender-blind.  But I do discriminate in one area.  When my annual physical rolls around, I always request a woman doctor.  This seems like common sense to me.  Why should I tolerate a strange man poking around in my most intimate private areas when there are plenty of qualified women professionals with whom I would be more comfortable? Apparently, this is a decision to which male gynecologists do not take kindly, according to this post by Twisty Faster.  Twisty quotes from an OB/GYN listserv in which one doctor takes pleasure in tricking women into thinking they are to see a woman doctor until he walks into the room and it's "too late," and another doctor advocates not "giving in" to the patient's preference for a woman doctor. 

I am not one to rag on the entire profession of male gynecologists.  I know at least one (the father of a friend of mine) who entered the profession with a strong feminist outlook and a dedication to women's health at a time when women themselves didn't usually become doctors.  But that doesn't change fact that I have a perfect right to choose who is going to see me naked and who is not.  And I don't think that it is unreasonable to decide that I'd rather not have random members of the opposite sex seeing me naked. 

My one experience with a male doctor (a GP, not a gynecologist) confirmed my prejudice. One year I was running a bit late on a scheduling my annual physical.  My former doctor had moved away, and I couldn't seem to get a timely appointment anywhere.  I said to myself, "Happy, you need to get over your excessive modesty.  The doctor will just look at you in a clinical way.  It's not that big a deal.  You're a grown woman and you have nothing to be embarrassed about."

So I scheduled an appointment with the male doctor. When I was taken into the examination room, the nurse instructed me to take off my clothes and put on  a flimsy hospital gown.  I did so and was sitting on the examining table with my bare legs dangling off the side and just a flimsy piece of paper covering the rest of me when the GP knocked and walked.  He immediately recoiled in horror and yelled, "OH MY GOD! YOU'RE NOT DRESSED!"  Having steeled myself to be naked with this guy, I was able to respond calmly, "Well, no, I'm not. The nurse told me to put on this hospital gown." The doctor apologized profusely, explaining that he would have preferred to meet with me first while I was still dressed.  I reassured him that I was not embarrassed and that it didn't bother me a bit to meet him for the first time while wearing the hospital gown.   The doctor was blushing profusely and insisted that he was embarrassed even if I wasn't. 

He was very nice, but his attitude had the effect of making me embarrassed even when I had steeled myself not to be embarrassed.  This was about five years ago, and I have never made an appointment to have a physical of that nature that with a male doctor again.

   

Comments

"I am not one to rag on the entire profession of male gynecologists. I know at least one (the father of a friend of mine) who entered the profession with a strong feminist outlook and a dedication to women's health at a time when women themselves didn't usually become doctors. But that doesn't change the fact that I have a perfect right to choose who is going to see me naked and who is not. And I don't think that it is unreasonable to decide that I'd rather not have random members of the opposite sex seeing me naked."

This is a perfectly reasonable statement.

[will]

Oops. That previous post was from me.

[will]

I am trying to think of something to generate some controversy, but I just cannot come up with anything except an old joke:

Happy woke up this morning absolutly dreading the fact that she had a doctors appointment today. It has been a year since her last check-up and it is time for papsmear. While getting her daughter dressed for school she thought of calling and canceling the appointment but decided to just get it over with.Happy dropped her daughter off at school and realized she had some extra time before the appointment,so she took this time to go back home and take a quick wash up before going. Happy runs in the house,heads for the bathroom,grabs a rag, and off to see Dr Jones. Once Happy is all prepared in her awful gown and lying on this awful bed Dr Jones enters the room and puts Happy legs in the stirrups and has the nerve to tell her to relax. After about three minutes of pain Dr Jones says"my my my we sure made some extra effort today" Happy totally ignored him because she was so ready to get home . Once Happy arrived home with her daughter Samantha,her daughter raced up stairs and called down to Happy asking’MA MA MA MA,WHERE IS MY WASH CLOTH" Happy weary and tired answered"Sam just get a new one.Sam says "NOOOOO,I NEED MY CLOTH FROM THIS MORNING.IT HAS ALL MY STARS ,SPARKLES AND GLITTER IN IT.

.

It is disappointing for a doctor to be embarassed by seeing his patient in a hospital gown.

[The Happy Feminist]

After having to wear the awful gown and lie on the awful bed, poor Happy had to come back to her computer and read this awful joke.

[will]

Sorry if that was too much HF.

[The Happy Feminist]

Oh no. Nothing I like better than a truly, truly awful joke.

[Richard]

>>> Why should I tolerate a strange man poking around in my most intimate private areas when there are plenty of qualified women professionals with whom I would be more comfortable?

The better question would be why you feel more comfortable with a woman. I would have absolutely no problem with a female physician poking about my loins as I don't view a medical exam as a sexual experience. The doctor's job is to analyze me as a biological organism sitting on the slab in the examination room. Obviously you think a male doc might be having naughty thoughts. Why else would you feel uncomfortable? Which might say more about your mindset than about his, no?

And I hate to see you reference Twisty's stuff as you do an insult to your own blog by the very mention. She's a miracle. Take her explanation for why male gynos say it's okay to go to a male gyno: "That’s because, in a patriarchy, men have a perfect right to be in charge of female reproductive organs." Can't you feel her pathology in that statement? Here, I'll help. I've inserted the word "men" into the following definition. Tell me it doesn't fit Twisty's blog personality:

"[BLANK] is characterized by a distrust of [men] and a constant suspicion that [men] around you have sinister motives. People with this disorder tend to have excessive trust in their own knowledge and abilities ... They search for hidden meanings in everything and read hostile intentions into the actions of [men].... They usually shift blame to [men] and tend to carry long grudges."

That's a definition for Paranoid Personality Disorder. Creepy fit, huh? In Twisty's world, American male ob/gyn professionals have all the sophistication and cultural aplomb of a 16th-century conquistador away for a fortnight of robust raping of the natives. Twisty has some things to sort out.

[bmmg39]

I think that, after the first priority of physical health, the second priority of patient's preference should be taken into account and accomodated if at all possible. A lot of men are embarrassed to be unclothed in front of a female nurse or doctor. (And then, I'm sure some men and women actually prefer having a staffer of the OPPOSITE gender.) Some people are modest and some aren't. It's not weird to have a preference as to who treats you.

On another note, Twisty, indeed, has some things to work out.

[Anne]

"The better question would be why you feel more comfortable with a woman."

I don't know about anyone else, but I prefer a female GYN because I've had both male and female doctors over the years and the bottom line is that the women have just been a better experience.

I was always pleased with the professsionalism and dedication of my male GYNs, but the exam itself was invariably uncomfortable, even painful. I've never had a painful exam from a female doctor. In fact, this topic has come up among my female friends and I'd estimate that 90% of them agree that their female GYN does a better job of the exam. (Almost all of them started with male doctors, back in the day.)

If you're comfortable with a female doctor, then that's okay. I'm sure there are women who are comfortable with their male GYN doctors, too.

(And, in reference to the anecdote about the doc who said he doesn't let women know they're seeing a man until he walks into the room and then it's "too late"? It totally isn't too late. Someone always has the right to excuse themself and not complete the appointment. You'll have to pay for the doctor's time, but some might think it's a fair trade for not being examined by someone who feels it's right to "trick" patients into an exam room.)

[The Happy Feminist]

Yes, I should clarify that I would respect a man's choice not to be seen by a female proctologist or urologist.

My discomfort with male doctors doesn't stem from the idea of the man viewing the exam as a sexual experience. After all, I don't inquire of my female doctors' sexual orientation and, for all I know, my doctor could be a lesbian or bisexual. It is just ingrained in me, rightly or wrongly, that you don't get naked in front of the opposite sex, EXCEPT in a sexual scenario. It also somehow feels more vulnerable to be naked and examined by someone with a different set of reproductive equipment than I. The traditional power differential between male and female, and particularly between a male professional and female civilian probably contributes to my discomfort as well. The point is that when it comes to getting naked I don't think that I have to justify my preference as to who gets to be present.

As for Twisty: I adore her. Her brand of feminism -- its emphasis and her positions on certain issues -- is quite different than mine, but I find her exteremely witty and I think she makes a compelling case for her point of view. Unfortunately, misogyny does exist in the world (whole societies are structured around it) and I think it's smart, not paranoid, to remember that fact.

[L.]

I don`t mind doctors of either gender, as long as I feel comfortable with their manner. Male OB/GYNs delivered all my babies, and I`ve had some bad experiences with female nurses who were rough and/or inconsiderate. (I DO have a STRONG preference for Western doctors over Japanese doctors.)

That said -- I understand why women would prefer female doctors and men prefer male doctors. It seems intuitive that you would want someone to know exactly what something feels like. Someone wiser than me once said, "Going to a male OB/GYN is like going to a mechanic who`s never driven a car."

[The Happy Feminist]

The other thing is that I TRIED to undergo an examination with a male doctor in which I viewed it as simply a clinical experience-- but the male DOCTOR couldn't seem to view it as just a clinical event.

[j0]

Be happy, Happy, that you have a choice in choosing a female ob/gyn. Now that I've moved to a much smaller community I had a choice between female ob/gyns that were affiliated with the local catholic hospital (so no birth control - even for a married woman!) or male ob/gyns. Not sure why there isn't an "independent" female ob/gyn practice here - I'd think there would be demand, but this is what there is. Fortunately, the male ob/gyn practice has a really cool female phys. asst., but still . . . would SO much rather have a woman dr. b/c when I talk symptoms or issues there's a decent chance that a woman would have felt what I'm talking about & as mentioned in prior posts they tend to be more gentle with the whole process.

[Richard]

>>> It is just ingrained in me, rightly or wrongly, that you don't get naked in front of the opposite sex, EXCEPT in a sexual scenario. It also somehow feels more vulnerable to be naked and examined by someone with a different set of reproductive equipment than I.

I'd love to hear a full analysis of this from you sometime. Why is nakedness limited to "a sexual scenario" for you? Why not also a medical scenario? And the vulnerable part is interesting too. If I understand what you're saying it's that because the male doctor has a penis and you don't, then you don't want him to actually *see* that you don't have one, because then you'll feel susceptible (vulnerable) to ... to ... to what, exactly? I don't understand. Is it just a silly cultural thing we'd be better off getting over? Could it be that whether your doc is male or female really *should* be irrelevant?

And I can't let your thick unwavering support of Twisty go unchallenged. I'm glad you adore her, but I hope that's only as one of god's creatures.

Twisty writes in the post you linked to: "This patronizing arrogance [of the doctors] is astonishing, but not surprising, given the supremely misogynistic nature of the medical establishment."

So Happy, do you think America's medical establishment is supremely hateful of women? Hmm? Don't give her a pass now. I haven't taken anything out of context. Words mean something, and that is exactly what she said. BTW, she had 158 responses to that post. Not a single one of her sisters challenged her on that comment. None. Can you see how some people might think she has issues? Her blog is full of stuff every bit as harebrained.

[Richard]

Clarification: The word "thick" in my above comment does not mean "stupid". (I know better.) It means "lavish".

[The Happy Feminist]

Richard:

1) Of course, Twisty means exactly what she says. One thing that I particularly appreciate about her is that she has an excellent command of the English language. The precision with which she uses language shines through.

2) Your use of the word "sisters" strikes me as patronizing. Why would you consider the readers of Twisty's blog to be her "sisters?" First, what makes you think they're all women? (They're not.) Second, why would you call them "sisters" rather than simply "readers of her blog" or "like-minded readers of her blog?" I know some feminist somewhere has talked about "sisterhood" but that term refers to the idea of women supporting each other's equality, freedom, and dignity. The term doesn't have any place in a reference to a group of people who read the same blog and talk about ideas and who DON'T use this term.

3) I am not up on feminist critiques of the medical establishment, but I know enough to know that feminist scholars and critics have written about a long history of contempt and even hatred for women in that profession. This is an established area of feminist work. I can't say that I am prepared to talk as an expert about the subject but here are some examples that leap to mind just from my very casual reading:

-- From the New Yorker: The inventor of the pill purposely designed it so that women would continue to menstruate each month because he believed that is an important part of being a woman. (If that isn't hatred, what is?)

-- There is an established history of doctors disbelieving their women patients' account of their symptoms. (I experienced this myself from a doctor who refused to believe me when I said there was no way I could be pregnant.)

-- Freud, for all his excellent contributions to the thought of the 20th century, surely hated women, and one would have to be foolish to believe that his hatred did not trickle down to the rest of the profession of psychiatry.

-- Some criticize the practice of having women lie back in stirrups to give birth -- it's not necessarily the best or most effective or most comfortable position, except for the doctor. It's certainly the position designed to give the woman the least control possible over what's going on.

-- The examples in Twisty's post support the notion of contempt for women by doctors. We have doctors TODAY advocating that the woman's preferences be overriden.

-- If I recall the New Yorker article on cervical cancer correctly, there was a lot of discussion about how doctors were taught in medical school that cervical cancer patients were "bad" women or "fallen" women because it is a sexually transmitted disease.

-- I am aware of numerous hair-raising examples of women being "punished" or treated badly by doctors for having sex outside of marriage. There have been some examples given just recently on some feminist blogs, but I can't be bothered to find the examples right now.

4) This is just off the top of my head and medicine is an area that I haven't really focused on. Suffice it to say, that whether you agree with Twisty or not (and I sometimes disagree), I have never had the impression that what she says cannot be defended. It's a valid point of view.

5) You're just mad because she called you a "dork."

[will]

"-- From the New Yorker: The inventor of the pill purposely designed it so that women would continue to menstruate each month because he believed that is an important part of being a woman. (If that isn't hatred, what is?)"

Is this true? I seem to recall serious discussions even now about whether a period is necessary.

"-- There is an established history of doctors disbelieving their women patients' account of their symptoms. (I experienced this myself from a doctor who refused to believe me when I said there was no way I could be pregnant.)"

Once again, I believe this is largely the result of the way the physician-patient relationship was viewed. I suspect that you will find fewer doctors able to stay in practice who do not believe the patient to be part of the process.

Doctors also regularly deal with people who are incredibly stupid/naive about their bodies and pregnancy. As you probably see in your law practice, your clients lie to you even when you tell them strenously how important the truth is. I think doctors have to be cautious about simply believing their patients.

"-- The examples in Twisty's post support the notion of contempt for women by doctors. We have doctors TODAY advocating that the woman's preferences be overriden. "

My problem was with the idea that male doctors should be viewed with contempt and as perverts. I do not have any issue with a woman prefering a female doctor.

"-- If I recall the New Yorker article on cervical cancer correctly, there was a lot of discussion about how doctors were taught in medical school that cervical cancer patients were "bad" women or "fallen" women because it is a sexually transmitted disease."

At that time, ob/gyn residency programs were predominately men. Now, those programs are predominately women. I do not think it is unusual that doctors believe what they were taught in school. This is why I think it is largely an issue of doctors then v. doctors now.

[The Happy Feminist]

Right. My impression is that the history of the medical profession's attitude towards women is pretty dreadful. I am sure there are feminists who have thought a lot more about this subject who can make a better case than I. (My mother by the way loathes doctors and felt that she was pretty badly treated by doctors, especially when she was pregnant and then caring for me as an infant circa 1971-72.) As for the current state of affairs, I don't really know-- mainly because I only see women doctors, and my health is generally pretty good. My main point is that I don't buy into the notion that Twisty's statement is "hare-brained" or without support.

[will]

"My main point is that I don't buy into the notion that Twisty's statement is "hare-brained" or without support. "

Which statement?

"some doctors are mysogynistic assholes." Sure. I agree completely. Maybe even, a lot.

[The Happy Feminist]

The statement Richard was complaining about:

"This patronizing arrogance [of the doctors] is astonishing, but not surprising, given the supremely misogynistic nature of the medical establishment."

[The Happy Feminist]

I wish I'd kept this New Yorker article about the pill. It portrayed the inventor of the pill as a devote Catholic who felt that a woman needed to go through a regular menstrual cycle in order to really be a woman. Part of the point of the article (and unfortunately I'm working from memory here) was that there wasn't a valid medical reason for this point of view. Obviously I am not a doctor and this was just one article, but that was the case that was made.

Women traditionally shed their uterine lining only very rarely until the invention of the pill and other reliable means of contraception. What with constant childbearing and nursing, traditional women very rarely menstruated. The constant menstruation women do now isn't good but increases the chances of cancerous cellular mutations as the ovaries reconstruct themselves every month. (Gee, I hope I'm not garbling this. It's been years since I read the article.)

[The Happy Feminist]

Last thought -- saying that the medical establishment is characterized by misogyny isn't the same thing as ragging on individual doctors. It's about critiquing the culture of medicine. Whether that critique is still valid today, I don't know.

[will]

I looked into this issue a year or so ago while trying to decide what to do with my daughter. (She is autistic and cannot handle the blood. She gets depo provera. As a result, she rarely bleeds.)

So I am familar with the history of periods. I believe that historically it was 3 or 4 times a year??

But, I seem to recall a number of ob/gyns that I asked saying that women need a period three or four times a year.

[The Happy Feminist]

Right. 3-4 times a year. That's quite different than 12 times a year!

[Scott Lemieux]

I have my own thing: I prefer to see female therapists. Unlike your preference, it's basically irrational--indeed, probably says something less than good about me--but for some reason, I find it much easier to talk to women about intimate life details.