Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watrose.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watrose!kwlalonde
From: kwlalonde@watrose.UUCP (Ken Lalonde)
Newsgroups: net.women.only
Subject: Re: sexist surgery
Message-ID: <6411@watrose.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Jan-84 01:58:14 EST
Article-I.D.: watrose.6411
Posted: Fri Jan 13 01:58:14 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Jan-84 00:29:59 EST
References: <393@abnjh.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 25

To those who brought up the circumcision controversy:  While I think
that circumcision of any kind is wrong, except for religious purposes,
and even then I have doubts, I don't feel circumcision comes under
sexist surgery. It is not a procedure done to degrade men. It is
usually performed on non-consenting babies and that's a whole other
kettle of fish.

As to survival: NO, women are not in general having these operations to
save lives, many women past menopause are told that the time has come
for their hysterectomies and to book the date now. No mention is made
of the risk (about 3 deaths per 500 hysterectomies) that goes with it.

There is also absolutely NO proof that a lumpectomy is less effective
in breast cancer than a radical mastectomy.  A radical mastectomy can
leave the woman weaker, delaying recovery.  In such a case, women are
used as guinea pigs.

Another, non-surgical example:  the very fashionable (for M.D.s)
pre-menstrual syndrome.  Yes, in some women there is a hormone
imbalance, but the idea should be to identify the cause, instead of
blasting away with progestin.  And creator help the women whose
problems are not caused by hormones - no one is looking at alternatives
(it doesn't pay).  Just like menstrual pain, there are now drugs to
help, but no one knows *why* our bodies are so out of kilter...
				- Madeleine Clin