Talking about double standards as a kid/teen with the opposite sex

As I'm sure most of you know, during school physicals and general pediatric check-ups, it is generally standard procedure for boys to strip and have their penis, testicles and scrotum examined, while for girls the standard procedure is generally to stay fully clothed and not have their breasts or vulva examined unless they have a complaint or are sexually active (I actually knew a girl in high school that knew this and lied to her pediatrician about being a virgin to avoid it). And the funny thing is, this isn't even a secret, for example: this is the form students at my old high school have to fill out (it's the same as when I was a student) http://www.vhsl.org/doc/upload/adm-form-physical-2013-14.pdf. They literally have on the form that gets handed out to students that only boys will get their genitals examined. Did anyone ever talk to someone of the opposite sex about this as a kid?

When I was in high school, I was sitting at lunch with four of my friends, three girls (one of whom was the girl that lied to her doctor) and a boy (who all three of us were very close with and talked about girl stuff in front of him). One of my friends was talking about how embarrassing her last physical was because when she told her doctor that she had sex, she "looked at her vagina". The boy at the table was like "aren't you used to it by now"? Apparently he didn't know girls didn't get examined there. When we told him, he got super flustered. One of the girls found it hilarious because she had no idea boys had to undress. She managed to get the boy to explain what his doctor does to him as well.

Did anybody have a similar experience?

Well, two examples.

When I was in elementary school we had a physical, boys and girls separated. We were to go in underwear. At some point the nurse, or the doctor I don't recall, had our briefs down, I don't recall what was examined. So when we came back we tried to get the girls to tell us whether they had had their panties down, but got no answer.

Much later, when considering joining the military I had to take a physical. There was a "genito-urinary" part, and I was warned by other dudes that it involved palpation of testicles - and it did, by a female doctor. But apparently for women they did nothing. I think the main reason for men was a regulation that prohibited joining the military if one had only one descended testicle, perhaps because in case of an accident the soldier would become infertile.

Hi Vivian. Welcome to Zity I see you come here with curiosity to learn & share experiences. That's cool. Hope you like it here & can engage in some good discussions, make friends here & all that.

When i was a kid, no one ever said anything to me about it, i just made assumptions. i just assumed girls didn't have to get checked like we do just simply because they didn't have testicles, so they didn't have to cough. So i had thought it was only a guy thing. And i thought since girls were "not developed" yet, there was really nothing for anybody to check. .

That was me then, and since i don't have any daughters, i wouldn't have any experience seeing how a pediatrician examines them. I did find a very nice looking lady before my son was born to be his pediatrician. I expect him to thank me when he grows up.

What shocks me in this form, Vivian, is that it's apparently meant for the administration of a sports program yet requests a lot of intrusive data (e.g. about periods in females). not to mention a genito-urinary exam on males. In France I think a sports organization can just request a yes/no certificate answering to "is there any medical inconvenience to the practice of this sport?", or perhaps with precautions, but certainly not ask about medical antecedents - because these are meant to be processed only by physicians.

I'm also shocked that a school physical would include a pelvic exam for girls unless they say they are not sexually active. What happens if one is active, does not want to lie but does not want the exam?

This sort of reminds of the thread on school uniforms in a way. From what i remember it seemed that some American schools went so far as to listing and describing - with numerical measurements of parts of clothing no less - of any clothing variable they could think of: shoulder straps x cm wide, skirts y cm high above the knee etc etc ... In a way it is a try at being comprehensive and complete about the subject at hand. It would almost sound scientific, if it weren't essentially comical and far too much like something a lawyer would come up. It just seems to me like school authorities are trying their best to cover every aspect and cover themselves from litigation at the same time. And it seems as if they are expecting contention and pushback.

It sure must be tiresome and exhausting to run a school ...

When I was in high school, I was sitting at lunch with four of my friends, three girls (one of whom was the girl that lied to her doctor) and a boy (who all three of us were very close with and talked about girl stuff in front of him).

That must have been a nice situation, having friends of both genders who were able to listen in or participate in such kind of conversations ... when I was in high school it was a boys-only situation. Perhaps it was good for enhancing scholastic achievements, but it was boring as can be otherwise. And it made it so much more difficult to find a girl friend. It took me until university. And i mean holding hands/kissing girlfriends too.

Agracier, I was in a mixed-gender highschool but in much of teenage years, many boys and girls only associated with students of the same gender. I think I became less inhibited about this in the last year of highschool - but it would have been difficult to have such a conversation.

I don't remember anyone really talking about the double standard when I was in school. But I feel that I was aware of it -- the fact that boys and girls were handled differently and treated with a totally different level of modesty and expectation of privacy.

There are many examples where boys were treated without any regard for their privacy or were treated in a vastly different way compared to the girls. And they were just expected to accept that as "standard practice". Examples:

School and sports physicals (as this thread already mentioned)

Nude swimming in high school or at the YMCA

P.E. differences (large gang showers, mandatory jockstraps and jock checks, shirtless games, etc)

Discipline and punishment (school paddling)

Military inductions (mass physical exams, nude exercises, etc)

When I was in high school take underpants for exam and yes males nude and separated, Dont watch males but we talk about after exam

When I grew up in Texas, I never had a physical exam at school. Periodic physicals were required, but you had to get them from your family doctor or pediatrician.

I agree with JimmyJohnson, when I was in school, there was just general knowledge, though never specifically discussed, that boys and girls had much different experiences during physical exams. My friends would sometimes joke about the genital and hernia exams. My understanding was always that girls did not have to expose their breasts or vulvas during exams whereas boys were stripped to their undershorts and had the penis and testicles inspected and examined.

I understand if students are participating in sports, they need to be medically cleared to participate.

But for the rest of the student body, it makes no sense to me for a school to hire medical personnel to examine students and record whatever. Why does it matter to the school if a boy has a hernia, or is circumcised or not? That's just none of their business. Similar for girls. If a student is having difficulty in class I can understand a teacher suggesting to a parent that they get the child's hearing or eyes tested. But for the school to provide the exam simply makes no sense to me. I'm liberal on some things, conservative on others, but I'd guess you'd have to call me libertarian on this one.

But for the rest of the student body, it makes no sense to me for a school to hire medical personnel to examine students and record whatever.

I totally agree with you on this. I see no reason why the school should think that maintaining the health of their students is their responsibility. That's what parents are for. Sure, there are exceptions if a teacher or administrator observes a particular student in poor health. But to do mass examinations doesn't make sense to me either. For sports -- yes, but otherwise no.

And even for sports, how is it relevant to conduct (as some forms posted here suggest) genito-urinary examinations? Or, even more intriguingly, only on males but not on females? Or to question females about periods?

Normally a physical for sports should focus on the capacity to do the sports in question without risk of injury, heart problems etc.

Normally a physical for sports should focus on the capacity to do the sports in question without risk of injury, heart problems etc.

I have said much the same thing myself about the American system. It would make sense to focus any medical checks solely on the actual risk areas associated with the activity. Instead there is clearly a blame culture where medical checks are in truth an ass covering exercise driven by the fear of lawsuits being brought by parents.

I would like to see any statistics on how many problems (relevant ones) are actually discovered during these examinations. The thing is, I would be surprised if any such statistics actually exist, which means there is no objective evidence to support the imposition of these intrusive examinations.

This is stupid. The unexpected happens sometimes and I've seen it.

It doesn't necessarily mean that someone is to blame.

I disagree with the double standard in this situation. A guy's genitalia is external and as such there is a higher risk of injury. But I also agree with physical's view on it. If your insurance will cover it then take your kid to your own doctor a few weeks before school starts and get their physical. More than likely your own doctor will do a far more thorough job and this visit will also be beneficial in terms of continuity of care. There is no need for a 3rd party to be involved. Would you want your kid to be groped by somebody you do not know? I know I would not even think of it even if the reasoning behind it was in the good name of "child welfare". Yes there is an ocean of competent, ethical and moral people in the world with the title MD or RN attached to their name unfortunately there are those (as within any occupation) who do not meet the standard. If a problem arises you will know about it prior to participation in athletics or PE. Otherwise keep the schools out of it. Keep them on a "need to know basis" only.

I totally agree with you on this. I see no reason why the school should think that maintaining the health of their students is their responsibility. That's what parents are for.

School exams became instituted at a time when not all families were able to pay for medical health care. Think of the pre WWII Depression Era. The classic example is screening for TBC which dates from a time when the disease was still quite prevalent. Few parents could pay for X-raying on a regular basis. And since TBC is a debilitating social issue - incapacitating males for military service - such screening was done at government expense in one way or another. Schools did not come into this except as a way of easily organizing and centralizing the screening.

The same applied to other medical aspects. Screening for diseases and conditions in early youth makes both medical and financial sense, preventing worsening conditions and perhaps preventing the onset of later developments. In terms of proverbs, it's the 'ounce of prevention' versus the pound of medicine wisdom.

And we should not think that all parents are capable of understanding the need for early medical exams and follow-up, nor even if all parents care at all. My wife's parents were utter cheapskates when it came to spending money on anything at all, let alone medical care for their children. If it hadn't been done via school, it wouldn't have been done at all.

So perhaps it is a parent's responsibility, but not all of them are very good at it. That's why it makes sense for whatever level of government to step in and remedy the slack. Unhealthy people often pose risks to others and the general health of the population. And historically, perhaps cynically but still true nonetheless, unhealthy people deprive the military of healthy recruits. This from a time when the size of an army counted more than the training and equipment and when military service was compulsory - for all healthy males.

Ditto with agracier - these "school exams" are actually a way to ensure that youngsters that may normally not see a physician often have some common problems diagnosed (eyesight, back, etc.). Also, there's the immunization checking - if only because children who can possibly carry disease are a risk in a school.

What I dislike is the blackmail involved if the examinations are more invasive (some people here have reported that girls were given an examination of the external genitalia unless they said they were not sexually active).

If this happens in some American schools, as has been written here, then I suppose it may have to do with checking for STD's or conditions like crabs or herpes, things that can easily be spotted and which are the result of being sexually active with a partner. You could say that with sex ed not always being of a high standard (think of the abstinence-only school of thought), it is not unreasonable to check more thoroughly with sexually active students of any gender.

You could ideally say that both genders should be thoroughly checked, forget about all that modesty stuff - 😃 - what's good for the gander should be just as good for the goose, to turn a saying on its head. But social customs and mores dictate otherwise in our present day and age.

On the other end of the scale of reasonableness - or unreasonableness - you might be excused for thinking that this happens as a way of 'slut shaming' as it were. The incorrect assumption that if a girl is sexually active in high school, she must therefore be promiscuous and of easy virtue. And therefore more accessible for certain embarrassing things, like having her genitals examined.

So I could postulate this being both unreasonable and reasonable - depending on the mind set behind the decision.

Agracier: I've heard of mothers more or less forcing their girl to have a gynecological exam once they learned the girl was no longer a virgin and sexually active... and indeed part of the idea seems to be "slut shaming" ("if you were not shy enough not to open your legs with a boy, why then act shy with a doctor").

Right ... sounds like a line from a movie ... can't remember which one, there must have been several ... sounds so very bourgeois French (or Belgian for that matter) ha ha.

Of course parents scare easily and traditionally nothing scares them more than having a sexually active daughter at risk of pregnancy and a 'social disease'. While I think it might have been more restful having a daughter instead of a son to raise, I'm certainly glad I never had to face those kind of issues ...

I certainly don't believe there is any aspect of sex shaming if upon learning your daughter is sexually active to ensure she is well educated on sexual health and has regular health checks.

Now I would never say forced to go is what parents should be doing but certainly it's nothing to do with "slut shaming" why does the fact she is sexually active make her a "slut" far from it.

It's just ensuring they have access to Proper care to enjoy sex with their partner and be healthy doing so.

Mollie: There may be I think an aspect of "slut shaming" if you *force* some young women to undergo invasive tests because they are sexually active.

I certainly don't believe there is any aspect of sex shaming if upon learning your daughter is sexually active to ensure she is well educated on sexual health and has regular health checks.

.

You might first question why a school has any reason to ask if a pupil is sexually active to begin with. A reasonable parent might wonder why it is any of their business to begin with. I'm certain many a pupil will think so.

So therefore a reasonable and correct policy would be for everyone to be treated equally. Examine everyone in the same manner and there's an end to it. Examine them all for sexually related issues - after all, who expects complete truthfulness in these matters - or don't do it at all.

Agracier, Let's hope that at least such forms are treated as confidential medical information and do not go in front of whatever secretary.

(When my kids had school physicals all information was in closed envelopes written 'confidential' and school staff cannot look at it.)

I need to say that school policy varies among the 50 states. Several national professional organizations publish recommendations with good intentions, but the states each have their own state organizations that set standards to meet local needs. New York for one explains their school health examination program as follows: “Among the purposes are: To make an appropriate assessment of the student’s current health status; To determine the student is free from contagion; and fit to attend and participate in all aspects of the school program; To indicate the need and extent to which the school program should be modified to benefit the student; To communicate to the parent/guardian any findings which require further investigation and treatment; and To provide an opportunity to counsel the student and the parents/guardians concerning: 1. Any health issues or conditions detected. 2. Securing appropriate care and supports in the school environment.” Most students have their own familiar health care provider, many others do not. New York mandates a more comprehensive examination on entry to school and in the K, 1st, 2nd, 4th, 7th, and 10th years. Currently an informed consent letter is sent to parents recommending their child be examined by their own physician but if they choose the school physical the following excerpt is included: "Although most parents do not attend examinations, you have a right to be present by prior arrangement with your school nurse. Your child will be asked age-appropriate psycho-social questions to assist the physician or nurse practitioner in targeting health risks. You may request a copy of sample questions from the school nurse. Please remember that efforts are made to question children uniformly, but based on children’s responses, the exact list of questions may or may not be addressed, and other follow up questions may be required.

Your child will be asked to disrobe to underclothing: boys will wear socks and underpants; girls will wear socks, underpants, and a loose shirt without a bra or undershirt. While every effort is made to preserve dignity and privacy, most health offices are too small to provide the level of privacy your child may be used to in his/her private provider’s office. Other children of the same sex may be in the changing area. Your child may need to walk small distances partially clothed to get to, from, and around the exam area. The exam includes a complete head-to-toe screening of all major organ systems, INCLUDING:

BREASTS/PUBIC AREA FOR GIRLS,

AND HERNIA/PENIS/TESTICLES/PUBIC AREA FOR BOYS,

AND INGUINAL/GROIN AREA FOR PULSE EXAMINATION FOR BOTH GENDERS.

The examiner will touch your child. There may or may not be an additional person as a chaperon present during the examination.

THIS IS AN INTIMATE EXAM BEST DONE IN YOUR PRIVATE PHYSICIAN’S OFFICE BY A PROVIDER YOUR CHILD KNOWS AND TRUSTS."

In addition also requires student athletes to complete annual pre-participation sport physicals. The other states are similar but different. New York state has over 3 million students ages 5 to 17. Their focus is to be helpful to growing children to remain healthy and safe. Mostly children want to know they are "normal" and parents just want them to grow up. I can't comment much about my personal experiences simply because after 50 years my memories are few. Maybe it was successful for me because I really didn't have any serious health issues until after I was 60. Amazingly, following a lifetime of excess and abusing my body, I still have pulse and respiration, for now.

The girls in my high school knew about the boys sports physicals in the school gym because some of the girls had to tag along with their parents who were driving their brothers to the school for the physicals. Even though the girls were not in the gym to see us lined up in our underpants, enough of them hung around while their brothers and other boys they knew were getting examined that they learned that we were required to strip down, line up and get examined. This was in the 70s and some moms even came into the gym to find their sons and watch their exams. The word got around school. Some moms probably told their daughters and their daughters told other girls so that information about what we had to do got around. Which meant that girls would joke about our physicals to our faces. I remember some girls in the lunchroom teasing several of us boys about having what they called the "cough test" and they started coughing. Which they thought was really funny and we didn't. Two of my girl friends at school had dads who were doctors and one of those dads did some of our physicals so the two of them knew more about our exams than the others and spread the word around. Plus every time the gym doors opened as other boys arrived, the rest of us were easy to spot lined up wearing nothing but white briefs. Some of the girls outside got a look.

I also had a girlfriend in college whose dad was doctor. She was interested in medicine and made me go to a doctor when I had a medical problem. I got my first full adult exam which I have described elsewhere. She was really curious about what had been done to me and I had to tell her even though I suspected later that she already knew more than she pretended. It was embarrassing to me but not to her to tell the story.

I remember some girls in the lunchroom teasing several of us boys about having what they called the "cough test" and they started coughing. Which they thought was really funny and we didn't.

I can see that scene as almost perfect for one or other teen comedy ... and odd they've never used something like this on the Big Bang ... 😃

Wonder how girls would react if teased about stirrups.

Thank you for posting this. I lived my life in New York State up until I reached 18 and moved to Florida. When I attended school in New York, we all had a physical with the school doctor. In middle school, the girls had to report to the auditorium (NO BOYS) and based on what I understand from the girls, they watched a movie about puberty in females and had a lecture by a nurse about females.

As for the boys...there was no movie...in middle school we were called down by alphabetical order by last name and went to the nurses office where we had to undress into our undies and get weighed, our height taken and then go behind a screen and the doctor would listen to our heart and then have us drop our undies and examine and penis and balls.

Most of the boys thought it was over until we were in high school and in 10th grade..once again only the boys were called to the nurses office...same exam as it was in 7th grade but this time most of us reached full puberty....the doctor would have his nurse stand by us, she would remove our undies and he would instruct us to stand and spread our legs as the nurse help us his nurse would stand behind us holding our arms behind our backs and shoulder looking down as the doctor would thoroughly inspect and examine our penis and balls. For me I would get very erect and since I had a very sensitive penis and an issue with premature ejaculation....I would cum....nothing was said..he took some tissues out and wipe me up. Then we had to turn around bend over the the nurse would check our spine and the doctor would inserted a lube finger into our anus and check prostate and for any abnormalities. Then exam was completed...we got dressed and went back to class.

After this happen, many of the boys shared there experiences nobody admitted if they came or not but I know when you were standing outside the room you would hear some of the boys moan & groan some so I assumed some boys did ejaculate. My friend Raymond who I slept over his house and his mom would inspect his penis (as my mom over the years would inspect me as well) we were close and shared our stories with each other and he told me when he bent over,,,that is when he ejaculated.

The school physicals for me was the worse and very embarrassing and for some reason don't know why the have them. I can understand if you played sports....but for us that didn't play sports...what was the purpose???