Table 7.

Uses of “normal” or “normality”

Critical reflection on the normative power of “normal” or “normality”

Certain ways of talking about bodily difference can imply a “need” for treatment, which can increase the emotional burden of normative pressure. It might be more helpful to avoid medicalizing vocabularies when discussing bodily and sexual matters. So doing introduces broader factors other than vaginal size and genital intercourse to affect the women's self-understandings and opens the door for questioning what is “normal” in sex (…) Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) would need to proactively question social norms about how women's genitals should appear and function. Second, and complementing the first suggestion, MDTs need to actively transform the clinical focus from treatment to women (Roen et al., 2018, 250–251)

(…) the pressure to normalize” might result in hasty treatment decisions, unrealistic expectations, and inadequate preparation, resulting in despondency and disengagement (…). If the focus of care were to be transformed to relationship and sexual confidence rather than vaginal size, when counseling women, health professionals might wish to emphasize sensual exploration, emotional intimacy, and sexual pleasure rather than coital performance (Dear et al., 2019, 301 and 304)