The nerves and vasculature of the clitoris are absent from OB/GYN literature
medium.com
medium.com
I don't think we had more focus on male anatomy in medical school than on female anatomy. In fact, I'm pretty sure it was quite the opposite. There's a whole unit on female anatomy and a compulsory ob/gyn rotation, but not a compulsory urology rotation (most students don't even get to do a urology term). This suggests to me the isn't some conspiracy in medicine against female anatomy.
Though, I can certainly believe the author's claims. Tradition holds too much weight in medicine. Also, it's ridiculous how few lay people actually know what a vagina is. Most times I see/hear that word they are actually talking about the vulva.
The biggest reason you see OB/GYNs saying they know it is because they think they know it, but they don't. This becomes apparent when they start saying things like, "the nerves are very small and difficult to dissect" or even "the nerves are microscopic." Because the anatomy is is some general anatomy textbooks like Grant's, Clemente, and Netter, it is taught in some medical schools (Wash U, U Chicago), and some people are actually learning it (more so than I thought).
I also realized they have included the anatomy longer than previously thought, as I previously relied too much on a physician ex to tell me what was in the textbooks. The main anatomy textbook he had in med school, Rohen's still doesn't have it. I have updated my article to try to explain that sometimes it is taught in medical school. I know as of 2012, it was not taught at UTSW. I know that on r/residency, most of the doctors who answer me telling me I don't know what I'm talking about do not know it. Some even tell me the nerves are "microscopic."
I'm talking, specifically, about the exclusion of clitoral anatomy. So, sure, the vagina, cervis, uterus, and ovaries are covered in depth. However, female sexual response is very important. People will think the anatomy is there because the anatomy is shown and/or described leading up to it.
Maybe OB/GYNs do learn it. But if they do, the ones that do are being quite negligent in not speaking up about the omission from their textbooks. They are also failing to mention it in journal articles on sexual function or female genital cosmetic surgery. Right? So why aren't they mentioning it if they know it? One OB/GYN I talk to did mention it in his textbook on genital cosmetic surgeries, but he actually misquoted his source, so it's slightly incorrect. He has been super supportive though.
However, some general anatomy textbooks still don't know it. Here is a review I just posted on Gray's Anatomy. https://medium.com/@jessica86/sexism-in-grays-anatomy-the-an...
I have been posting reviews with screen shots so people can see what I'm saying is true. I also posted photos of clitorises, which include some cadaver dissections at the bottom, to show people what this anatomy looks like.
I've also thought maybe there should be a way to put money behind my claims. I can also get my plastic surgeon father to verify everything I say as far as it being dangerous and messed up that the anatomy isn't in the textbooks. He also thinks fundamentally the refusal to add it to boards means GYNs aren't going to know it.
The biggest way to solve it is to just get it added to board exams. If they "know" it, they can test for it on boards.
Or is it seen as a not-appropriate-for-work thing? If so, why not? I'd think more of my colleague for reading this in their lunch break than reading through their Facebook feed. I would be even more impressed if that colleague wasn't a doctor.