We report an18-year-old girl with a four-year history of a slow-growing labial mass with a sudden increase in size in the last year. Examination revealed a large fl eshy 20 cm perineal mass centering on the left labia majora and attached to it by a 1cm pedicle. It was associated with pain, ulceration and discharge. The lesion was excised via diathermy at the base of the stalk. The excised specimen weighed 1.112kg and measured 20.5 x 17 x 5cm. The lesion showed a solid, soft whitish, cut surface. Histology revealed a hypocellular tumour with focally oedematous fi brous stroma in which were scattered large and small blood vessels, mast cells and other chronic infl ammatory cells. True myxoid matrix was not observed. The stromal cells had a spindle to stellate morphology. There was no signifi cant cytological atypia, mitotic activity or necrosis. The tumour cells were negative for SMA, desmin, CD34, S100 protein, EMA and PR. The diagnosis was clinically and histologically challenging because various vulvovaginal soft tissue tumours often have overlapping clinicopathological features. However, based on strict histological criteria and the absence of worrisome cytological features, a diagnosis of fi broepithelial stromal polyp was rendered despite the unusual size. A review of the literature shows that whilst vulvovaginal fi broepithelial stromal polyps are well described, giant variants are rare. Awareness of the extraordinary size that can be attained by such polyps can fascilitate swift clinical and histological diagnosis.