More Feminist News!

Black man vs. white woman – The Boston Globe: “Hillary Clinton contends with gender stereotypes, and Barack Obama with racial ones. Which bias runs deeper in the American psyche? The answer does not bode well for Clinton.” (Oppression Olympics defined. Just check out the graphic!)
Vaccinating Boys for Girls’ Sake? – New York Times: “Will parents of sons consent to a three-shot regimen that has been marketed as benefiting girls? How do you pitch that to Gardasil Boy’s parents? Think altruism. Responsibility. Chivalry, even? Oh, and yes: some explicit details about genital warts…” (Shocker: this is in the Styles section.)
Obama: First Female President? – Newsweek.com: “It has been a rarity in modern political life: a wide-open race for the nomination of both parties. But whatever happens from here on out, this campaign will always be remembered for the emergence of the first serious woman candidate for president: Barack Obama.”
Never Too Young for That First Pedicure – New York Times: “One recent rainy afternoon, Eleanor LaFauci, 7, sat with her feet in open-toed foam slippers, admiring her toenails, freshly painted watermelon pink. ‘Look, we’re reading an adult magazine,’ Eleanor told her mother, gleefully waving a copy of People…”
Want the government to pay for your sex change? Go to Iran. – FP Passport: “Last fall, Passport noted that more sex-change surgeries are performed in Iran than in any other country except Thailand. Ayatollah Khomeini approved them for “diagnosed transsexuals” 25 years ago, and today the Iranian government will pay up to half the cost for those in financial need.”

and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

75 Comments

  1. the15th
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    “Obama: First Female President”? What. The Clinton-as-first-black-president article was written by Toni Morrison; this one is written by a man. (A man who appears to be a McCain fan.)
    The Globe article may not be what everyone wants to hear, but it isn’t just the one-dimensional “oppression olympics” polemic that the title makes it sound like; it cites a lot of really interesting studies I wasn’t aware of before.

  2. Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    I’ve been correctly chastened by the article on kiddie manicures. My nine-year-old daughter’s friend just went for one for her birthday and I innocently thought that might a fun thing for us to do (I like to have someone do my nails occasionally, but mostly don’t pay that much attention).
    But the whole idea of Kids getting older younger really hit me. My kid should be doing kid things, not paying for adult grooming of questionable value that entrenches a whole lot of traditional femininity.
    Thanks for the reminder.

  3. dedf
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

    Great, now it takes a man to be a woman.

  4. dedf
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    Great, now it takes a man to be a woman.

  5. Dio
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    I wanted to get the Gardasil vaccine. Turns out not many insurance providers cover Gardasil for men. It’s the most expensive vaccine -ever-.

  6. the15th
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    By the way, I also appreciated how the Globe writer uses “identity politics” as a neutral term describing any time people make political decisions based on any aspect of their identity, not as a pejorative aimed at women or ethnic minorities.

  7. JustAGrrrlGeek
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    I think that the article on very young girls getting pedicures was a bit mixed up. It jumped around from topics like parents spending huge amounts of money on mani/pedi parties to young girls wearing nail polish and lip gloss. That seems like a big leap to me. I know that when I was a kid, I like glittery, bright coloured things, and anything strawberry scented, so I fail to see that as a huge problem with our youth. Training young girls to be consumers drinking virgin Cosmopolitans, however, is just eerie.

  8. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

    I also appreciate the Globe article.
    I’m not sure if it’s right about everything, but it certainly reflects my thoughts about my personal experiences and observations living in communities resembling our nation’s diversity…

  9. betty
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    Harsher for a woman: Gloria was Right: From the Boston Globe article:
    “Race can evoke more visceral, negative associations, the studies show, but attitudes toward women are more inflexible and — to judge by the current dynamics of the presidential race — ultimately more limiting.
    “Gender stereotypes trump race stereotypes in every social science test,” says Alice Eagly, a psychology professor at Northwestern University.
    In one particularly telling strain of research, called the Goldberg paradigm, two sets of participants are asked to comment on something, perhaps a resume or a speech or a work scenario in which a boss speaks with an employee. To one audience, the person involved is described as a woman, in the other he is a man. Time and again, male participants (and, in some cases, women as well) judge the resume more harshly if it is a woman’s, or say the speech was strident if given by a woman but assertive if given by a man, or that the female boss was pushy while the male boss was concerned.
    Women in these studies are typically judged to be less capable than men with identical qualifications, but it’s not impossible for them to be seen as competent. The problem is that if they’re understood to be capable, the majority of respondents also see them as less likable.
    “The deal is that women generally fall into two alternatives: they are either seen as nice but stupid or smart but mean,” says Susan Fiske, a psychology professor at Princeton who specializes in stereotyping.
    And unlike racial bias, there’s little evidence that these attitudes are softening.”

  10. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    Actually a lot of the point it makes are things I’ve argued in other threads here…

  11. Posted February 28, 2008 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    Want the government to pay for your sex change?
    I should mention that this also happens in the United Kingdom.

  12. Wildberry
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

    Obama is NOT “the first serious woman candidate for president,” and I take offense to that suggestion, Mr. Special Guest Columnist.
    Especially since, though I just skimmed over the article, it was saying that because Obama acts like a woman and Clinton acts like a man. Who is he to decide what women and men act like? Damn stereotypes.
    Nina, what is “it”? I assume you’re talking about one of the articles but I don’t know which one…

  13. Wildberry
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    Obama is NOT “the first serious woman candidate for president,” and I take offense to that suggestion, Mr. Special Guest Columnist.
    Especially since, though I just skimmed over the article, it was saying that because Obama acts like a woman and Clinton acts like a man. Who is he to decide what women and men act like? Damn stereotypes.
    Nina, what is “it”? I assume you’re talking about one of the articles but I don’t know which one…

  14. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    “it” is the Globe article. See my 2:51 post…

  15. Deadra
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

    Marnanel-
    The difference between the UK and Iran, though, (and this is not mentioned in the article, unless I’ve missed it) is that this policy has set back the Iranian Gay Rights Movement several decades. “So you’re a man who likes men? Clearly you should really be a woman, let us take care of that…”

  16. Deadra
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

    Marnanel-
    The difference between the UK and Iran, though, (and this is not mentioned in the article, unless I’ve missed it) is that this policy has set back the Iranian Gay Rights Movement several decades. “So you’re a man who likes men? Clearly you should really be a woman, let us take care of that…”

  17. Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

    re, the Iran article, hm… transsexuals are all really just gay men who will go extreme ends in order to be straight? That sounds strangely familiar…

  18. Deadra
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    Marnanel-
    The difference between the UK and Iran, though, (and this is not mentioned in the article, unless I’ve missed it) is that this policy has set back the Iranian Gay Rights Movement several decades. “So you’re a man who likes men? Clearly you should really be a woman, let us take care of that…”

  19. AbbieNormal
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    There’s a Libby Lu in the mall near my house. I’ll walk past it sometimes and see these hoards of little girls, all in identical clothing and blond wigs like pop stars (excellent role models, of course). I can’t stand it; it seems like a prime way of telling girls that we all need to look and act a certain way to be cool or beautiful. Elementary school girls could be learning so many better things!

  20. AbbieNormal
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

    There’s a Libby Lu in the mall near my house. I’ll walk past it sometimes and see these hoards of little girls, all in identical clothing and blond wigs like pop stars (excellent role models, of course). I can’t stand it; it seems like a prime way of telling girls that we all need to look and act a certain way to be cool or beautiful. Elementary school girls could be learning so many better things!

  21. waxghost
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

    JustAGrrrlGeek, I agree. I don’t see anything wrong with liking girly things. It’s when those are the ONLY things in a girl’s life that it worries me.
    But I don’t agree with this (from Steph): “My kid should be doing kid things.” A big part of being a kid is learning how to be an adult in your society, so even when kids are imitating adults, they’re “doing kid things.” I’m much more concerned that so many girls might be getting the idea that being a woman is based solely on how she looks.

  22. waxghost
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

    JustAGrrrlGeek, I agree. I don’t see anything wrong with liking girly things. It’s when those are the ONLY things in a girl’s life that it worries me.
    But I don’t agree with this (from Steph): “My kid should be doing kid things.” A big part of being a kid is learning how to be an adult in your society, so even when kids are imitating adults, they’re “doing kid things.” I’m much more concerned that so many girls might be getting the idea that being a woman is based solely on how she looks.

  23. waxghost
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

    Oops, sorry, didn’t realize hitting refresh would also re-post it.

  24. Posted February 28, 2008 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

    Attempt to smear the democratic candidates by accusing them both of transgressing gender boundaries before you endorse McCain? Yes, that would be lovely, Mr. Asshat Conservative Newsweek Writer.

  25. lizmosphere
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 5:07 pm | Permalink

    From the Boston Globe article: “Sexual prejudice isn’t terribly common — male chauvinists don’t dislike women, they just have particular ideas about their capabilities and how they should behave — but with race, stereotypes tend to go hand-in-hand with prejudice.”
    Does this seem wrong to anyone else? I know that I see plenty of dislike (even hate) in the chauvinism in our society. As for the author’s point that a black presidential candidate is more widely acceptable than a woman, I think he is right. It is much more acceptable for a person to be a sexist in this country than a racist. This became clear to me when I started a thought experiment of reversing race and gender in news stories I heard and soon the distinction will become very clear. Some of the things that are commonly said about women, would be wildly offensive if said about any other group.
    His point about positive role models dispelling these prejudices is a strong one. Hopefully, the more acccustomed we get to seeing powerful women, the more natural it will seem. Either way, if we elect Obama and/or Clinton, our new president will be a great step forward for the range of ways we imagine the look of power.

  26. lizmosphere
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

    From the Boston Globe article: “Sexual prejudice isn’t terribly common — male chauvinists don’t dislike women, they just have particular ideas about their capabilities and how they should behave — but with race, stereotypes tend to go hand-in-hand with prejudice.”
    Does this seem wrong to anyone else? I know that I see plenty of dislike (even hate) in the chauvinism in our society. As for the author’s point that a black presidential candidate is more widely acceptable than a woman, I think he is right. It is much more acceptable for a person to be a sexist in this country than a racist. This became clear to me when I started a thought experiment of reversing race and gender in news stories I heard and soon the distinction will become very clear. Some of the things that are commonly said about women, would be wildly offensive if said about any other group.
    His point about positive role models dispelling these prejudices is a strong one. Hopefully, the more acccustomed we get to seeing powerful women, the more natural it will seem. Either way, if we elect Obama and/or Clinton, our new president will be a great step forward for the range of ways we imagine the look of power.

  27. EG
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 5:19 pm | Permalink

    Sexual prejudice isn’t terribly common — male chauvinists don’t dislike women, they just have particular ideas about their capabilities and how they should behave
    This seems wrong to me because as a sentence it makes no sense. Having particular ideas about women’s capabilities and how they should behave is sexual prejudice. Thinking that a particular group of people is inferior to you, as male chauvinists think of women, is sexual prejudice. Characterizing women as liars, cheaters, unreliable, etc. is hatred. What’s the point of this sentence–if white people said en masse, “We don’t dislike blacks, we just think they shouldn’t be in charge,” that would be worse? Better? I don’t understand.

  28. waxghost
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

    I thought that sentence was wrong too. Male chauvinists most certainly DO dislike/hate women, especially women who don’t behave like they think women should behave. But even women who behave like they think women should behave are often subject to derision just for being women in the first place; if that’s not hatred of women, I don’t know what is.

  29. beigelights
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

    The Boston Globe article was really interesting to me. I didn’t see Oppression Olympics; I think it was a really well written and researched piece. To clarify on the above posts, the article states that, “Stereotyping is the tendency to ascribe people a set of traits based on the group they belong to (e.g., “black people are good at sports,” “Jews are cheap”). Prejudice is an emotional bias, disliking someone because of their group identity. And discrimination is how we act on the first two.” So chauvinists, according to the article, are ascribing certain traits to women (emotional, helpless, fond of pink) but they aren’t prejudiced, according to this definition, because they like women that way. It’s semantics, and I can see how the statement seems wrong, but I don’t think the author is trying to let chauvinists off the hook – it’s a very interesting analysis of the way identities are perceived by all of us.

  30. natmusk
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

    Stereotypes are an example of prejudice. Prejudice is when have a belief that one race/sex/orientation is inferior to yours and stereotypes are an example of that.
    When someone performs an action based on their prejudice it becomes discrimination

  31. keshmeshi
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

    Racists love black people, when they behave “correctly” (i.e. behave in a deferential manner and serve white people with a smile).
    I see know difference between them and misogynists who love women who, again, behave “correctly.” In fact, MRAs talk all the time about how much they love women, well at least all women who aren’t castrating bitches.

  32. keshmeshi
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    Oh my God. I can’t believe I just wrote “know difference.” *Blush*

  33. Posted February 28, 2008 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

    I didn’t have a pedicure until I was in college.

  34. Mina
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 8:51 pm | Permalink

    “I wanted to get the Gardasil vaccine. Turns out not many insurance providers cover Gardasil for men. It’s the most expensive vaccine -ever-.”
    Now I wonder how long before they cover it for guys the way they cover rubella vaccine for guys. Isn’t that one a standard vaccine mainly to protect women from getting rubella while pregnant?

  35. Posted February 28, 2008 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

    “the first serious woman candidate for president”
    Are you fucking KIDDING me????
    It would be one thing if Obama were running against another dude — at least then, it might only be mildly annoying in the way oversimplification based on stereotypes usually is. But, um, there is ALREADY a woman candidate. Once again, who cares about women when you can rally around a charismatic MAN?
    Mother. FUCKER.

  36. eastsidekate
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

    Deadre– recognizing the legitimacy of transsexual women and paying their medical expenses hasn’t set back the Iranian gay rights movement; government programs to exterminate homosexuals have set back the Iranian gay rights movement.

  37. Ninapendamaishi
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

    “Racists love black people, when they behave “correctly” (i.e. behave in a deferential manner and serve white people with a smile).”
    Certainly I think throughout most of our history that’s how most white people thought, and I’m sure some people think that way today. But I actually think what’s even more common today is that a lot of white people like blacks who don’t conform to the typical “black culture”. I.e. they have the accent of a typical white, they dress like a typical white, they care about what typical middle-class whites care about, etc. And this is sort of something we’ve talked about in my African-American Studies classes…
    And it was also something included in the article. I haven’t seen a survey on it, but I would find this believable. I know a lot of older people (e.g. my parents, unfortunately) who feel this way.

  38. Juan Stoppable
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

    It would be one thing if Obama were running against another dude — at least then, it might only be mildly annoying in the way oversimplification based on stereotypes usually is. But, um, there is ALREADY a woman candidate. Once again, who cares about women when you can rally around a charismatic MAN?
    I don’t think an article in which the author calls two US Senators “gender-benders” is a ringing endorsement, so much as it is an exploration of their own neuroses.

  39. jane
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 11:22 pm | Permalink

    Ninapendamaishi,
    I suspect that some of these people would think acting like or “passing” for white is acceptable, but they don’t want to accept that you take yourself serriously and actually think you’re as good as or better than a white person.

  40. Vodalus
    Posted February 28, 2008 at 11:47 pm | Permalink

    Man, I mostly came out of the “Obama as Woman” article with a feeling of jealousy that there’s no way on earth a female candidate could get away with those tropes.
    Also, RE: sex changes, was anyone else surprised that there was no mention of Iranian women pursuing this policy? I wonder if it’s just uncommon or if there’s substantial societal pressure preventing transsexual women from entering the ranks of the ruling male class.

  41. Posted February 29, 2008 at 12:25 am | Permalink

    this comment is about the boston globe article “black man vs white woman” and the responses to that article.
    i’m shocked that folks are 1) buying into the idea of black man vs white woman and 2) REALLY seriously think that sexism is worse than racism. 2nd wave feminism anyone?
    I’ve got tons to say on this subject but i’ll spare ya’ll for now :> I’ll just share a few thoughts. It’s very reductive and unproductive to say this is black man vs white woman.
    Obama has REALLY catalyzed a 50 state strategy where every state matters (clinton has repeatedly called many states unimportant), clinton has had negative attacks ALL along her campaign, especially when she was down in the polls (obama has always been positive even when he was down).
    Clinton has been a war HAWK, and hasn’t apologized for her vote for the war, and obama was strongly anti-war and was vocal about it (i know he wasn’t in the senate at that time).
    Clinton has made numerous errors in her campaign’s strategy. If Elizabeth Edwards were running for president we wouldn’t be having the same discussion about her, as her agenda and attitude would be very different, there’s a different amount of respect , even though she also is a member of the white elite with a husband who served in office. Anti-clinton thoughts have more to do with real issues than the fact that she’s a woman.
    The reasons why people may like obama more than clinton go WAY deeper than black man vs white woman. To be so reductive is to COMPLETELY insult the american center and left. COMPLETELY.
    Sexism is worse than racism? Come ON! I don’t really have much more to say. Comparing sufferings undermines the efforts of either movement.
    As a Woman of Color Feminist, i tend to look at the ISSUES at stake and the ability of a candidate to seriously carry a progressive majority (50 state strategy, every state and individual counts) and the ability of a candidate to proudly say they’re anti war.

  42. Marissa
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 12:55 am | Permalink

    To restate what several other commenters already have on the little girl makeup article, I also felt like it jumped around from larger issues to non-issues. I hate the obsessive two gender system and that girls are taught that beauty is THE essential quality as a woman. However, I have no problem with the lip gloss and pink toenails. I think it is important for children to dress up as different parts in life. Maybe it is like trying on different adult identities. Maybe it is simply dress up, like halloween. I used to LOVE to dress up very stereotypically girly as a little girl and I am now an adult feminist who doesn’t try to fit the stereotypical feminine ideal. I think what is key is to allow kids (boys and girls) to experiment and dress up like this if they want to, but pair it with other sense of self building activities that are not based on gender stereotypes.

  43. Marissa
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 12:56 am | Permalink

    To restate what several other commenters already have on the little girl makeup article, I also felt like it jumped around from larger issues to non-issues. I hate the obsessive two gender system and that girls are taught that beauty is THE essential quality as a woman. However, I have no problem with the lip gloss and pink toenails. I think it is important for children to dress up as different parts in life. Maybe it is like trying on different adult identities. Maybe it is simply dress up, like halloween. I used to LOVE to dress up very stereotypically girly as a little girl and I am now an adult feminist who doesn’t try to fit the stereotypical feminine ideal. I think what is key is to allow kids (boys and girls) to experiment and dress up like this if they want to, but pair it with other sense of self building activities that are not based on gender stereotypes.

  44. Marissa
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 12:58 am | Permalink

    To restate what several other commenters already have on the little girl makeup article, I also felt like it jumped around from larger issues to non-issues. I hate the obsessive two gender system and that girls are taught that beauty is THE essential quality as a woman. However, I have no problem with the lip gloss and pink toenails. I think it is important for children to dress up as different parts in life. Maybe it is like trying on different adult identities. Maybe it is simply dress up, like halloween. I used to LOVE to dress up very stereotypically girly as a little girl and I am now an adult feminist who doesn’t try to fit the stereotypical feminine ideal. I think what is key is to allow kids (boys and girls) to experiment and dress up like this if they want to, but pair it with other sense of self building activities that are not based on gender stereotypes.

  45. J7Sue
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 4:12 am | Permalink

    I watched some of the transsexual in Iran programme. They did show at least one trans man, but as usual majored on the medicalised trans woman freak show angle. I didn’t watch to see what techniques they use, but picking up the UK comment – it’s not such a good deal in the UK. Assuming they agree to treat you at all, you have to do a 2 year “Real life test” before being put on the surgery wait list – some patient care trusts have several year waiting lists as they only fund one a year – and then the surgeons in the UK are not up to the Thai state of the art. Some of the thai surgeons take 8 hours plus to do an SRS op, while some of the Brits take 2. A simple penile inversion with little depth is easy for the surgeon, but not the best possible for the patient. I suspect the same applies to the Iranian surgeons.

  46. mistwolf
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 5:42 am | Permalink

    The UK does offer aid with GRS, but you have to go to a doctor on the NHS, and frankly, all the surgeons in the UK approach butcher status. x.x
    I had my surgery in Thailand with Dr. Suporn. I didn’t pay any less than someone going to any of the other top-notch surgeons, though many people assume that that is why I chose Thailand.
    But outside of the fact of Dr. S being an artist, I love knowing that a good chunk of the fee he charges foreigners goes towards subsidizing women in Thailand who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford anything but cut-rate, low-quality surgeons. I met a few of the native girls while I was there and they were absolute sweeties. :)
    As for young girls and pedicures… Well, I am mixed on that one, but I worry that it will be a ‘gateway’ to scarier things like pre-teen Brazilians. x.x

  47. mistwolf
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 5:43 am | Permalink

    The UK does offer aid with GRS, but you have to go to a doctor on the NHS, and frankly, all the surgeons in the UK approach butcher status. x.x
    I had my surgery in Thailand with Dr. Suporn. I didn’t pay any less than someone going to any of the other top-notch surgeons, though many people assume that that is why I chose Thailand.
    But outside of the fact of Dr. S being an artist, I love knowing that a good chunk of the fee he charges foreigners goes towards subsidizing women in Thailand who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford anything but cut-rate, low-quality surgeons. I met a few of the native girls while I was there and they were absolute sweeties. :)
    As for young girls and pedicures… Well, I am mixed on that one, but I worry that it will be a ‘gateway’ to scarier things like pre-teen Brazilians. x.x

  48. mistwolf
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 5:49 am | Permalink

    The UK does offer aid with GRS, but you have to go to a doctor on the NHS, and frankly, all the surgeons in the UK approach butcher status. x.x
    I had my surgery in Thailand with Dr. Suporn. I didn’t pay any less than someone going to any of the other top-notch surgeons, though many people assume that that is why I chose Thailand.
    But outside of the fact of Dr. S being an artist, I love knowing that a good chunk of the fee he charges foreigners goes towards subsidizing women in Thailand who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford anything but cut-rate, low-quality surgeons. I met a few of the native girls while I was there and they were absolute sweeties. :)
    As for young girls and pedicures… Well, I am mixed on that one, but I worry that it will be a ‘gateway’ to scarier things like pre-teen Brazilians. x.x

  49. mistwolf
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 6:03 am | Permalink

    The UK does offer aid with GRS, but you have to go to a doctor on the NHS, and frankly, all the surgeons in the UK approach butcher status. x.x
    I had my surgery in Thailand with Dr. Suporn. I didn’t pay any less than someone going to any of the other top-notch surgeons, though many people assume that that is why I chose Thailand.
    But outside of the fact of Dr. S being an artist, I love knowing that a good chunk of the fee he charges foreigners goes towards subsidizing women in Thailand who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford anything but cut-rate, low-quality surgeons. I met a few of the native girls while I was there and they were absolute sweeties. :)
    As for young girls and pedicures… Well, I am mixed on that one, but I worry that it will be a ‘gateway’ to scarier things like pre-teen Brazilians. x.x

  50. mistwolf
    Posted February 29, 2008 at 6:08 am | Permalink

    The UK does offer aid with GRS, but you have to go to a doctor on the NHS, and frankly, all the surgeons in the UK approach butcher status. x.x
    I had my surgery in Thailand with Dr. Suporn. I didn’t pay any less than someone going to any of the other top-notch surgeons, though many people assume that that is why I chose Thailand.
    But outside of the fact of Dr. S being an artist, I love knowing that a good chunk of the fee he charges foreigners goes towards subsidizing women in Thailand who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford anything but cut-rate, low-quality surgeons. I met a few of the native girls while I was there and they were absolute sweeties. :)
    As for young girls and pedicures… Well, I am mixed on that one, but I worry that it will be a ‘gateway’ to scarier things like pre-teen Brazilians. x.x

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

227 queries. 1.022 seconds