This is topic So, About All This Plastic Surgery Jimmer-Jammer in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=023281

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 
I have a question.

I've caught an episode or two of Extreme Makeover and I've seen adds for The Swan. Extreme Makeover (and, I take it, The Swan) is a show that follows a person's transformation from mostly unattractive - at best, average - to mostly attractive through a series of cosmetic surgeries to be unveiled at the end to loved ones who 'ooh' and 'ahh' at the results and tell them that they're beautiful.

Most of these people are married, and so obviously someone loved them enough to promise eternal devotion regardless of what they looked like in their natural package. It's not a dating game, it's a longed-for metamorphosis into the person someone has always desired to be. Maybe they just hate their teeth, or their nose, or their pouchy tummy. But they end up getting the whole kit-n-kaboodle. Everyone gets chin implants, whether they realized they needed one or not, and procedures to make their skin glow. Eyebrows are lifted, breasts are enhanced, and butts are reshaped. It's a whole new you.

Almost universally among the people I consider to be balanced, reasonable people, this entire premise is considered offensive and repugnant. It's buying into society's concept of what is acceptable, or not. Nobody should be told they're not good enough because of what they look like. People who do this kind of thing are vain and shallow, or giving into other people who are vain or shallow. And so on and so forth.

But I'm of two minds about this, although I've never particularly been morally offended at the concept of cosmetic surgery. While I think, yes - no one should feel they are not good enough based on how they look, I also think that believing someone isn't going to base ANY self-worth on how they look is completely unrealistic. I don't know if this is such a bad thing. It's what makes us shower in the morning and not allow our teeth to rot out of our heads. And it's what causes us to dress appropriately for each occasion, looking as attractive as we can in each circumstance. It's actually considerate to other people to look the best we can, because they're the ones that have to look at us. So, when we hate our package - and some of us may have adequate reason to do so - why is it so repugnant to want to do what we can to change this situation?

You know the adage, "I've been rich and I've been poor, and rich is better?" I've been particularly attractive, and I've looked like I fell off the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down. And then fell on an ugly guy at the bottom. And then ate him. Let me tell you, particularly attractive is vastly superior. I'm the best looking I've been in my entire life right now and I've never had a more balanced self-esteem. I don't feel conspicuous, I don't think if someone doesn't like me it's because they're just too put-off by my looks. Granted, I was pretty insecure. And, granted again, I could be accurately called pretty vain at this time in my life. But I don't think an equally accurate term would be 'shallow'. I don't pursue physical beauty at the cost of learning, improving my character or at the risk of my spirituality. I do it in conjunction with all of these things, and I feel like I'm finally becoming a well-rounded person.

Now, let's say that someone is stifled by their sense of self-worth due to their looks. It's like there's this gnormous wall built in their brains that they just can't get around, and on that wall is an equally gnormous mural of what they consider to be their big ugly self. Beyond the wall is self-improvement of all sorts, but this wall is seemingly impenetrable. Ideally, we as people should bite and scratch and beat at these mental walls until we break them down with our own bare hands. But what if the person is just weary of this fight. What if they could choose to simply have the mural on the wall altered making it a little more manageable, a little less overwhelming to face? Are they really cheating themselves of well-earned psychic muscles, giving into the shallow image the world and its media has fed them and taking the ethically cheap way out?

I can't say that I think they are.

So, my question is: For those of you who do find this sort of thing offensive, without going with an automatic gut reaction to it, why do you find it so repugnant? This question isn't meant to come across as a challenge, but simply a desire to understand.

And, special bonus round question, am I insane in the membrane for not automatically getting it?
 

---

Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
 
It's too late for me to think seriously about this topic.

But I can say that I'd totally be more interested in watching if more of the surgeries were performed using a car sun roof.

4 serious.

[ April 09, 2004, 12:29 AM: Message edited by: Bob the Lawyer ]
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
Hm. I'll try to be succinct.

Basically, it bothers me because the idea of doing that sort of thing to my body bothers me. I like bodies the way they are; I don't have any tattoos or piercings and I don't particularly want any.

I think that if you want to feel good about how you look the best way to do it is to get into shape, not to have the fat sucked out of you by a glorified vacuum cleaner. Faces... well... I dunno. It's a gray area. There are things I don't like about my face, but I don't see myself getting plastic surgery to change it.

I'm not sure I can explain it. Sorry.
 

---

Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
 
Maybe it's becasue the women really aren't that ugly. It's like they are making their self esteem worse saying, you are so hideously unattractive we've got to:
And then they show them in their underear and draw lines on them saying, lift this, tuck this, enlarge this, decrease the size of this.
Much like you'd do to a car or something.
Take this door off, change these hubcaps, get new headlights...
It's dehumanizing.

I don't understand the use of breast implants in the first place, putting silicone sacks under one's skin.
And for what?
Breasts the size of basketballs?
All the nipping and tucking in the world can't fix a person's self image...
 

---

Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
 
I am an anti-fan of breast implants. Fake boobs feel different and not nearly as pleasant as the genuine article. Fake ones may be perkier but real ones are more fun.
 

---

Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
 
I think that Ralphie's got a valid point. If this is the only thing that can help these people's self esteems, I think that they're entitled to do what they wish. However, I am against it being televised. What business is it of others?

But then again, it's these people's personal choices. So I really have nothing to say to that. But I don't think that having plastic surgery is the best way to cure your self-esteem problems. I mean, I have self-esteem problems, but even if I had the money, I wouldn't have anything done to myself. It's something that people can ideally work out for themselves.
 

---

Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
 

quote:

---

For those of you who do find this sort of thing offensive, without going with an automatic gut reaction to it, why do you find it so repugnant?

---

quote:

---

I am an anti-fan of breast implants.

---

quote:

---

I like bodies the way they are; I don't have any tattoos or piercings and I don't particularly want any.

---

YAY! Me too.

[ April 09, 2004, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: PSI Teleport ]
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 

quote:

---

And then they show them in their underear and draw lines on them saying, lift this, tuck this, enlarge this, decrease the size of this.
Much like you'd do to a car or something.
Take this door off, change these hubcaps, get new headlights...
It's dehumanizing.

---

quote:

---

However, I am against it being televised.

---

quote:

---

Now, if someone really feels that they are so unattractive that they are terrified to look in a mirror, then that might be different. There is a different standard for a person who may have terrible burns or a missing nose or something.

---

It all depends on what you mean by that. My roommate is a very very attractive young woman, but because of her battles with eating disorders, she is afraid to look at herself in the mirror. It's treading a very fine line, the idea makes me uncomfortable, personally.
 

---

Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
 
Ryuko- I think I addressed that in the "looks basically okay" paragraph. I was trying to make an obvious distinction between people with real physical problems, and people with sad mental hang-ups.
 

---

Posted by Krankykat (Member # 2410) on :
 
Interesting post, Ralphie. I really don't find plastic surgery offensive for people who really need it to improve their quality of life. For example, I knew this wonam who had a jaw (there is a medical term for it) that protruded drastically. She was really unattractive because of it and very unhappy. She had surgery to correct it and afterward she was very attractive and her self-esteem improved. This was a good thing for her.

But the the TV shows that you referred ARE repugnant. They are cashing on those women who are looking for that "15 minutes of fame," and further promote the shallow view that looks and big boobs are woman's only important assets.
 

---

Posted by Richard Berg (Member # 133) on :
 
If they tie their happiness to surgery, why not offer them a way to do it for free? Is there that big of a difference between these shows and Trading Spaces? (Getting worked up about your home is more vain, I'd argue, since it's nowhere near as necessary as maintainance to one's body.) Honestly, even drawing a moral distinction betweeen belly tucks and gym workouts rests on shaky ground.

Make no mistake, I'm in the latter category. My heart thanks me, and my exterior will show it better than mere surgery (still no OR procedure for muscle growth). But to claim that the "hard sweat" provides ethical weight to my way would rely on Puritan ways of thinking that are thankfully (finally ) on their way out. Work will set you free in Poland, perhaps, but I'm more inclined to think that music or cuddling or something is better suited. If pizza and laziness yet [sort of] good looks are all important to someone, I feel glad that they've chosen to subsidize my hospital bills.
 

---

Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
 
I like bodies and faces as they are.

I grew up in suburban NJ in a very preppy/yuppie town. The guys all tried to look like they rowed crew. The women all tried to look like Christie Brinkley. They looked boring... and the woman who didn't look at all like Christie Brinkley but tried anyway just looked even worse.

I was glad to get to college and be in an environment where folks dressed liked they wanted to. When people could express their own style more, and not try to squeeze into a narrow social definition of style, they were much more interesting and beautiful.

Plastic surgery makes me think of the Dr. Seuss story "The Sneetches." What's considered to be beautiful changes way too often in society -- Marilyn Monroe was a sex symbol in the '50s, but if she was around today there'd be snide media comments about how fat she was... Even if national plastic surgery care suddenly became the right of every American, rich people would figure out desirable operations to have that no one else could. If everyone had stars upon thars, then rich Sneetches would pay to get the stars removed from their bellies, so that they'd be the best Sneetches on the beaches...
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 

quote:

---

Plastic surgery makes me think of the Dr. Seuss story "The Sneetches." What's considered to be beautiful changes way too often in society -- Marilyn Monroe was a sex symbol in the '50s, but if she was around today there'd be snide media comments about how fat she was... Even if national plastic surgery care suddenly became the right of every American, rich people would figure out desirable operations to have that no one else could. If everyone had stars upon thars, then rich Sneetches would pay to get the stars removed from their bellies, so that they'd be the best Sneetches on the beaches...

---

I'm not talking about making Barbies. I'm talking about no longer vanishing into the oblivion of the painfully plain and entirely forgettable.

btw - I really appreciate you guys taking the time to post. Even if I'm zeroing in on things I may initially disagree with, I'm taking in everything you're saying and weighing it in my mind.

[ April 09, 2004, 02:21 AM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
 

---

Posted by Stan the man (Member # 6249) on :
 
Not a big fan of plastic surgery, but I won't balk at the idea of maybe a skin graff here and there. I know it's not the same, but ah well.

Breast implants.......Hmmmm. I don't particularly care for them. However, I do know a lot of women that have them. One of them (I found this out not too long ago) is a pretty, almost plain, woman. I thought hers were natural. They were proportional to her body. They weren't huge, but ........they were........nice (couldn't find a way to end this sentence). I've known her for a while too. If that is what she wanted and is happy with them, then I am happy for her.

What do ya think about the muscle implants for guys? Bleh.
 

---

Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
 
ralphie,

would it be too much to ask you to rephrase your question in a pretty simplistic concrete form for the dunder-heads amongst us?

(I'm very glad to see you posting again, BTW.)

fallow

PS. Or just tell me why yer so shy?

[ April 09, 2004, 02:17 AM: Message edited by: fallow ]
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Personally, I find it much more acceptable to get plastic surgery than to spend hundreds of dollars on clothes. At the very least, neither one is more offensive than the other.

It's not shallow to take pride in your appearance. It's part of being human and a social creature. As Ralphie said, we all do it. We all take time to make ourselves look presentable before we step out the door. At the very least, we do it on 'special' occasions. So, what's the big deal about plastic surgery?

A lot of posters think televising this somehow reinforces the idea that ugly people are bad. However, this takes us back to the previous observation that everyone does something at some point to make themselves look good and that people are social creatures. Beauty, the appearance of what is beautiful, is a social construct. When anyone makes themselves look good, they are working within social standards of beauty of some sort. If this is so, are these shows simply not extensions of this basic principle?

Let's consider the converse idea, that we should ignore what everyone else is doing or thinks about us and just 'be ourselves'. Couldn't this be said to be incredibly selfish? Doesn't this ignore the idea that perhaps it is good to work within a society and fit in? That society very much encourages this? That the rewards of doing so aren't just vainglorious pride, but a good mate, a better job and, therefore, more opportunities for you and your children? I think the answer is yes, and with the stakes so high, wouldn't a person have to be crazy not to take the opportunity to help grease their skids through society by making themselves hew as close as possible to social standards of beauty?

[ April 09, 2004, 02:27 AM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
 

---

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
 
Isn't it "Jibba-Jabba?"
 

---

Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
 
The people I've known who had plastic surgery were all 1) very beautiful people 2) very insecure people 3) I could tell no difference before and after, except sometimes they look sort of weird afterward. Like not quite alive anymore. Like that tissue isn't really real or something. Not sure how to describe it. Mostly I've seen zero difference. No doubt to them it seems major, but to others perhaps not.

I've seen boob jobs, nose jobs, facelifts, posterior lifts, and liposuction.

The worst things about surgery to correct the affects of aging is that you're still old when you're done. You still are stiff when you get up from sitting a long time, and have to hold fine print far enough away to read it, or go get your glasses. You still are old. There's no way you're going to have your old 18 1/2" waist again, Miss Scarlett, you done had a baby.

The skin has lost its flexibility, and so tucking a bit of it away doesn't really fix anything. It's still less pliable and stretchy, and it will just sag again in a short space of years. You have to get it done again and again, in other words.

Doing yoga and pilates and hard aerobic exercise are much better anti-aging schemes, since they actually work from the inside out. They make a real difference in the underlying mechanics of the machine.

Ralphie, you are breathtakingly beautiful, and you are insecure. You will not be more beautiful or less insecure after getting plastic surgery. And we can't love you any more than we already do.

All that said, if people really want it and think it will make them happy, then it's fine by me. I will even pretend to see a difference. But you won't catch me under that knife, no way!
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 
I'm more insecure than I am beautiful, Anne Kate. Fear not, though. I'm not contemplating cosmetic surgery. Well, except laser surgery. I've lost my contact for the last time.

edit: Basically, this particular post is to definitively state that I'm not looking for some sort of justification for plastic surgery. I'm not contemplating it. This thread is not deeply personal, unless I actually do have an epiphany and find a clearer connection between the mind-body-soul mystery. Then it's really personal.

[ April 09, 2004, 03:49 AM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
 

---

Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
 
new condo or lasik, that is the conundrum. To live in superior beauty or to be able to see it in it's natural glory without the aid of flimsy lenses?

seems to have worked for most of the folks I know.

fallow
 

---

Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
 
I have a good friend who gets a lot of teasing (only among close associates, mind you) for the fact that she had a breast reduction. For her, it was something that made her feel beautiful and I have no problem with that. For people who undergo moderate surgeries, I have no complaint.

On the other hand, I think something that our racially diverse society should be ashamed for promoting is a universal standard of beauty. Think about it - even famous actresses of minority races; Halle Berry, Lucy Liu - have European facial structures and slim, girlish builds. We would call people bigots for calling dark skin ugly, but we have no problem running full page ads depicting "Swan" contestants as ugly because of their pale Celtic complexions, their broad, flat Native American faces, or their full Polynesian figures. Women are expected to work hard for their appearances, and for some naturally hairy, pale, chubby, frizzy-haired girls, there's not a lot that can reasonably be done to transform them into Jennifer Aniston.

I occasionally have problems with the way I look - I think I got a rather odd mismatched assortment of genes from my mixed heritage - but I'm not going to waste thousands of dollars fixing myself to someone else's standards. If diet, exercise, and a little more time with the tweezers than expected isn't enough to make me a swan, I'm signing up for a different audience.
 

---

Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
 

quote:

---

If diet, exercise, and a little more time with the tweezers than expected isn't enough to make me a swan, I'm signing up for a different audience.

---

Wise words which I hope you don't mind me quoting in the future...
 

---

Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
 
Annie,

That was brill. I wish you would expand. Just theoretical. I think it's funny that often times the ideals that are sold to us aren't even bought that well. This still strikes me as odd. How a image or ideal that isn't representative, or even successfully pursued all that often can still maintain the center in our frame of "want"?

fallow
 

---

Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
 
I love it that the ads at the bottom of this page are for rhinoplasty pics and a plastic surgeon! Hah!

We should start a new game to do with the ads. Somebody think of something fun.
 

---

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
 
Annie, my branch of Celticness is olive skinned spank-you-very-much.
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
Weeelll, I've always claimed to have the perfect Renaissance figure. I think I'd far rather an operable time-machine than plastic surgery and make-overs.

This could be a childhood hangover from my grandmother's reaction to my pierced ears. Her thought was that God made our bodies just so, and there should be no tinkering with them. If He wanted an extra set of holes in my ears, He would have put them there. That being said, she also purported that "cleanliness is next to Godliness" and that folks should treat their bodies as temples. And while God took us as we were (after all, He made us), we were to -particularly on Sundays - dress nicely and give the hair a few extra brushes and make sure the hands and behind the ears were perfectly clean.

Her one vanity was her silky smooth skin. Oil of Olay. But NEVER any make-up. And she was perfect and beautiful in every way to us kids.

Soooo - I guess, Ralphie, that for one reason or another, I think these sorts of make-overs are kind-of trite and silly. For someone with obvious disfigurement (burn victims, etc.) I would whole-heartedly support THEIR desire to have things chnaged.

But probably my biggest shudder at the whole idea is the idea of Michael Jackson's metamorphosis.
 

---

Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
 
If God wanted clothes, he would have put them there. Not so far a stretch from body-piercing to simple garments, I wouldn't think? Maybe a step down the ladder of the biblical extreme to the civilized?
 

---

Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
 
*clears throat*

Go back and review your Bible stories, silly one

God did put clothes there. He killed a couple of animals to cover Adam and Eve's nakedness when he banished them from Eden. Or so the stories go . . .

Michael Jackson still bothers me, however -

[ April 09, 2004, 07:38 AM: Message edited by: Shan ]
 

---

Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
 
Hmm... silly God, figs are for kids?!

speaking of kids...

*shepard's staff hooks fallow around the neck and drags him off stage*
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
I actually have a list of elective surgeries I want to have done when I can afford them. None of them is on the order of implants or lipo, and none of them is really intended to change my appearance so much as let me be lazy.

I don't understand breast implants. It wasn't that hard to find a man that liked my little boobies. And I'm pretty sure larger ones would just get in my way. I don't begrudge them to anyone who wants them, though, so long as they aren't getting them from Discount Knockers.

I haven't seen any of the reality shows to judge. I do watch What Not To Wear. From the ads, it always looks shallow, but they really don't try to make everyone into a cover model. They focus on how appearance affects their interactions and who they are and where they are in life. It's interesting to watch how many different kinds of wardrobes they put together for people with different lives. Sure, every woman gets pointy shoes and every man gets a leather jacket, but each person gets to become a better dressed them rather than a standard trendy cutout. Watching it is slowly changing the way I dress, and I don't think that's a bad thing.

If the emphasis of the surgery shows is to use the process to become more comfortable with who you already are, I can't see them as a bad thing. However, the advertising doesn't lead me to think that at all. I'm waiting for Fox to combine reality shows and make Buttertroll Island, where average looking women are trying to win the affection of a gorgeous man and in the finale they have to choose between marrying him and getting a total body makeover.
 

---

Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
 
I was planning on covering these shows for a column, and now most of the stuff I was going to say (or, rather, joke about) has already been done. Feh.

Sure, force me to get more creative, I see how you all are...
 

---

Posted by Zamphyr (Member # 6213) on :
 

quote:

---

Women are expected to work hard for their appearances, and for some naturally hairy, pale, chubby, frizzy-haired girls, there's not a lot that can reasonably be done to transform them into Jennifer Aniston.

---

She's the perfect example of someone who became famous for looking perfect after plastic sugery. Leperchaun can't launch your career, rhinosplasty can.

[ April 09, 2004, 10:40 AM: Message edited by: Zamphyr ]
 

---

Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
 
Ralphie,

quote:

---

So, my question is: For those of you who do find this sort of thing offensive, without going with an automatic gut reaction to it, why do you find it so repugnant? This question isn't meant to come across as a challenge, but simply a desire to understand.

---

Hmmm. That's a tricky question, and your points about murals and such are well-placed. Physical appearance is a huge part of self-esteem, and anyone who says it ain't is (to quote the film) selling something. I think I find it offensive not necessarily because I'm offended that someone would do it. The more I think about it, the more I reach the same conclusion you did: I can't blame `em.

I think the reason it offends me is, ultimately, I'm angry that self-esteem and assigned value in society is so frequently dependant (or at least connected) to physical appearance. And not just physical appearance as it relates to unhealthy conditions, such as obesity, bad teeth, anorexia, uncleaniliness, etc., but to whether or not someone's face is ordinary, their eyes are right, their hair isn't styled correctly, they don't wear the right clothes, etc.

I think it offends me because there are many people who are hurt by these kinds of things, even some that are made miserable by such things. I think it angers me because though the practical aspect of me recognizes that's just the way it is, the idealist is upset by it.

Did I answer your question? I can't even remember now, heh:)

Of course, my reaction to a specific surgery or whatever, would be subjective. It'd depend on how attractive or ugly I thought the person was, how silly or reasonable the surgery was, etc.

But as for the television shows? I'm disgusted with them, because I think they serve no purpose other to aggravate the things above I mentioned that make me angry.

Edit: re: Reality television. Celia, frankly I'm wondering if Stephen King had some kind of time machine when he wrote Running Man. If you've never read it, it includes 'reality television' beyond the title of the book, but also things like "See which man can make it across the crocodile pit without being devoured" and "see which fat guy has a heart attack first on the treadmill".

[ April 09, 2004, 10:57 AM: Message edited by: Rakeesh ]
 

---

Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
 
I did like the one episode where the lady really had some major dental problems, and in part of her make-over they totally re-did her teeth, etc. It really made a huge difference - -having a nice smile.

Maybe I just liked it because I wish someone could do that for me -- I have really bad teeth, but the cost of having everything fixed that needs to be fixed for me to have a decent smile is way out of my price range. I can't even afford to get my kids braces, so I'm not about to spend money on myself on dental work.

Farmgirl
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
You know what... the google ads that go with hatrack threads are now providing me with an endless source of amusement. (See bottom of this page for example.)

The thing is, that I suspect most jatraqueros would be much more careful and give warnings to the links out of respect to our hosts compared to what just pops up from google.

I've got to bump a gay-marriage thread and see what it advertises there!

AJ
 

---

Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
 
Oh, and I think you can put away your Cypress Hill records The number of people having different views says you ain't insane in the membrane (for this reason, anyway )
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
I have no problem with plastic surgery. I think that the drive toward ornamentation is a pretty natural part of being human, and that plastic surgery is a natural enough outgrowth of that. If I had a weak chin, I wouldn't think twice about getting a chin implant, for example.

Happily for me, I like how I look, and have always enjoyed the occasional oddity in my appearance. I like my attached earlobes, for example, and I think that my unusually small teeth look really cool (in addition, I love the fact that there is plenty of room in my mouth for all the wisdom teeth my jaw could possibly decide to sprout). I *don't* like the shape I've gotten into recently, and I don't think twice about going to the gym to change that.

I do think that in 50 years or so people are going to look back in horror on the primitiveness of current cosmetic surgery practices. I envision people saying "My god, they'd actually have themselves cut open, and have bags of silicon stuffed into their chests? They'd actually jam a tube into their abdomens and vacuum out their fat, and then squirt it into their cheeks? Thank god we can just drink this little vial/get this shot/apply this patch and grow whatever changes we want".

Here's a question--if you could buy potions that, when imbibed, caused you to, say, sprout decorative but non-fuctional wings, or grow horns, or a pelt of really cool looking fur, or scales, or spines, or a tail, or a chiton exoskeleton, or whatever, and then counter potions that would reverse the changes when you were done with them, and you knew that there were no serious side effects to the potions, would you take them? I would. I would *love* that!
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 

quote:

---

I do think that in 50 years or so people are going to look back in horror on the primitiveness of current cosmetic surgery practices.

---

I agree, and I think this is going to have very interesting effects on society. We're only seeing the tip of the iceberg. Weren't given a good genetic hand? Change yourself. Want to be black? Change your skin color. White? Ditto.
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
Yeah Storm, I think that you and I are on exactly the same page with regard to this stuff. I was planning on mentioning that in my last post, but forgot to do so.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
I think in a very fundamental way, it's going to totally kill the artificial boundaries (objectification, for those that want to phrase it that way ) that society has setup in regards to what it means to be black, or white, or male, or female.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 

quote:

---

if you could buy potions that, when imbibed, caused you to, say, sprout decorative but non-fuctional wings, or grow horns, or a pelt of really cool looking fur, or scales, or spines, or a tail, or a chiton exoskeleton, or whatever, and then counter potions that would reverse the changes when you were done with them, and you knew that there were no serious side effects to the potions, would you take them?

---

No. I never would. Maybe I would have as a kid, but not now.

edit: As I think about it more, I think that as a teen I would have thought it was cool, but I never would have done it.

[ April 09, 2004, 11:30 AM: Message edited by: mr_porteiro_head ]
 

---

Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
 
Potions is a bad word, Noemon. You should have said prescription medicines.
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
Really Porter? How come?

What about functional changes--eyes that could see better in the dark, or under water, or could see infra-red or ultraviolet? A functional prehensile tail? Hollow bones and functional wings? Gills?
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
I think you're right PSI!
 

---

Posted by Alexa (Member # 6285) on :
 
I don't care what other people do. What is it to me?
 

---

Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
 
Well, it affects the world you live in, Alexa.
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
Noem, I'd only take it if they were functional wings. Decorative ones would just get in the way, and make wearing a shirt difficult. By the way, did you read coil's book when he posted it here?

Rak, I think it's more likely that some execs read running man and thought, huh, that would be good TV.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
It's hard to *really* know what you would do in a situation that I believe could never happen. And, following the rules of logic, if those things will never happen, then anything I say would be true. I could say that if those things were available, I would turn into liquid metal and kill Sarah Connor.

But, to answer your question... part of it comes from my belief that my body is a temple, and should be treated with respect. Another part comes from my feelings that worrying too much about your physical appearance is just a silly thing to do. It's something to do when you are a teenager and don't have anything useful to do with your existence.

Many of you disagree, and that's fine. That's just how it is for me.

So as a result I would never get any piercings, nor a tatoo. I don't think that coloring hair is wrong, but I would probably never do it nor encourage it.

But then you asked about functional changes? Possibly. I would like to have laser surgery on my eyes when I have a few thousand dollars floating around. Gills -- I'ts hard for me to believe that having gills wouldn't come with some drawback, and I'd have to examine it. Wings -- no thanks. As fun as I think it would be to be able to fly, the size of wings required to lift my body would be huge. Those wings would make it so that I couldn't sit in a normal chair nor drive a normal chair. It would make too much of life difficult. Fully functional prehensile tail? Now you have found something to tempt me! *THAT* would be awesome. But in the end, I think I'd rather dream of having one than actually get one.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
I would be all over gills like a cheap suit. I would *love* to be able to swim at will under water.
 

---

Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
 
The problem with gills is that they don't make you resistant to underwater pressure.
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
If you want them to work, I think they have to be on you and not the other way around.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
One problem with prehensile tails is that it would be very hard for pants to be modest. I would be *very* uncomfortable.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
PSI, that still leaves a lot of area to explore.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
Humans can withstand quite a bit of water pressure if they do it right.
 

---

Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
 
What do you do, go lower very slowly?
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
*imagines Porter with a prehensile tail*

As alluring and intriguing those possibilities are to me, I don't think I would have those things done to myself. Some of my reasons are similar to the ones Porter stated. I do think wings and a tail would get in the way, but the tail I could perhaps live with.

If there were some way to have the changes be temporary, like some sort of virtual reality, I think I would love to play around with it. Does that make me a furry?

*imagines self covered in fox-soft fur with a long tail*

I could go for a guy with wings, though, guys with wings are HOT (a la Escaflowne).
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
I thought that was what Noem was asking about. A reversible change with no side effects.

And, yes, it does make you a furry.
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
According to the Geek Hierarchy chart, that makes me a bottom feeder.
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
That's a heck of an innuendo.

Tell me, are you wearing bunny ears right now? You are, aren't you!
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Beverly, celia.

Celia, Beverly.

 

---

Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
 
Cosmetic Surgery--Fine.

If it makes you feel better--fine.

But it should, and normally does come with a big not-- Changing ones outside does not help with the problems on the inside.

Being shy and having low self esteem doesn't change with large breasts, smaller noses, or more manly backsides.

I have not watched the makeover shows because I don't find them interesting. My body is not something I use to attract followers. It could be better if I worked at it, but I have other things I would rather do.

The first shows, that describe and detail the transormation of a person were OK, if you want to see that sort of thing.

The Swan is not.

It is exploitive, dangerous, and disgusting.

Its Plastic Surgery as a competitive sport. The victims--er recipients of this surgery must undergo massive amounts all in a short period of time. Their insecurities which may have sent them in search of painful answers are not being addressed, but are being broadcast to the world to scoff at, then after the pain and suffering to try to improve ones self image, half of the contestants are quickly told, basically, "You are still a loser!"

Sorry. I just don't like the whole idea.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
I don't know how they dive deep distances, but they manage it. There are people that do what I think is called "free diving" -- no scuba gear -- and they go down something like 200, 250 feet. I think they can manage that because they aren't breathing while they do it.

Any scuba-divers here? I understand that it's coming back up that they have to be careful to avoid the bends.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 
I first read "more manly backsides" as "many more backsides"

Kinda like the green and striped cheat with two butts.
 

---

Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
 
Regarding diving:

The human body is mostly incompressible. The only parts that compress are the lungs and a few other small air cavities such as your sinuses and ear canals. Diving quickly (so long as you remember to clear your ears periodically) doesn't really hurt you at all. Free divers don't have to worry about narcosis or the bends, because those effects are caused by breathing compressed air; the nitrogen in the compressed air has a very high partial pressure and gets into your bloodstream, causing narcosis, or into your joints, causing explosion (the bends). Swimming with gills would avoid all of that. The only other danger is embolism of the lungs, which, if you are not breathing compressed air, is also not going to be a problem. There will be a point at which your lungs (and therefore your chest) will want to compress beyond the yield strength of your ribs, but you'd have to be pretty deep, and you could also avoid that by just filling your lungs with water (since you don't need them underwater anyway).

Now, back to the actual purpose of the thread:

I do have a gut reaction against these cosmetic surgery shows, but when I stop and think about it, the real problem I have is not necessarily that the women (and sometimes men) on the show feel that they need the surgery. It's that I think the whole concept of the show promotes surgery as a good way of dealing with your problems and potentially undermines healthy body image for the viewers. I know that these shows do show the surgery and it comes across as quite an ordeal. Maybe if the show ended there I would feel differently, but no, they end with a smiling, pretty, purportedly happy person. I cannot believe that these shows don't hurt efforts to combat low self esteem, body image problems, and eating disorders.

And finally:

We missed you, Ralphie!
 

---

Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
 
About scuba, there was a guest on Letterman (some chick) who had the world record for deepest free dive (or whatever it's called). They drop you down really quickly (like seconds) and then spend most of the time on the coming back up. And that's all I have to say about that.

About plastic surgery, I don't think the good outweighs the bad. I think at this point enough's been said. And also (this is kind of an aside), why would you not want to look your age? Why take the lines out of your face? You should wear them like battle scars that say, "Look. I've been here for awhile. I've laughed. I've cried. I've seen a grown man naked."
 

---

Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
 
Mmmm. Men with huge wings...
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Saxon, excellently informative post!

jehovoid,

I saw a show where they actually had footage of free divers and what I saw, if I recall correctly, was that they used weights to get down deep fairly quickly and then a portable flotation device of some kind that they inflated once they had gone down as far as they could so that they could get back to the surface quickly.
 

---

Posted by jehovoid (Member # 2014) on :
 
I defer to you guys. Maybe my memory isn't serving me this morning.
 

---

Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
 
By the way, Toni, just to let you know, despite your request that I not run off with her, in your absence celia has replaced you as my #1 fangirl.
 

---

Posted by ak (Member # 90) on :
 
If they could really have no side effects, sure it would be great fun to change bodies all the time, be a shapeshifter. But there's a lot more to a body than what shows. To be able to fly like a bird, for instance, you must make FUNDAMENTAL changes in the cardiovascular system, the lungs, and the skeleton. You have to have huge breast muscles to make the wings work, for instance, and probably a huge keel of a breastbone to attach them to. To maintain our same brains (or as closely as possible) we'd have to have rougly the same body mass or more, and that would entail a gigantic wingspan. To keep our large heads from messing up the aerodynamics of flight, we'd probably need a big bony crest and long tapering face. In fact, a flyable person would have to be very much like one of those big pteradactyls with the 50 foot wingspans. And flapping flight would be minimal. We'd have to mostly soar on thermals.

And then you get to the changes in spirit and personality that would necessarily follow from taking up life in the air. There is necessarily an enormous shift of viewpoint when you change your life experiences so much. Don't get me wrong. I believe that when it is possible, people will do it. And I think it will be very cool. I look forward to the diversification of the human species when we are in space and in all sorts of different environments. It enhances the beauty and complexity of existence.

Just don't think it will be a simple thing you can try out with no risk of changing yourself profoundly. Changing your body like that will be no safer than falling in love.
 

---

Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
 
*hugs Ralphie* It's so nice to see you post! I realized in reading the initial post how much I miss you. Did you know that shortly after we saw you last fall, Ross asked me if I was going to cut off my hair again or let it grow out... then he said he missed when I had hair down to my waist. I won't say that you had an influence on that, but...

About plastic surgery and Extreme Makeovers... I used to be absolutely set against vanity surgery. Then I learned that a close friend had had breast reduction surgery in her late teens, and her reasons were pretty clear -- she is an athletic person and being extremely top heavy made running more painful than it needed to be. Not to mention very conspicuous. At 19 she was already having back problems. Ten years later, she was still glad she'd had it done.

Then another friend of mine had breast augmentation surgery. She was naturally top heavy anyway, but having had a baby when she was 15 had a pretty dramatic effect on them. At 38, she wanted to be able to buy regular bras, rather than the $100 bras that kept her from looking much older than she was. She wanted to be able to wear regular swimsuits. Mostly, she wanted to not feel so self conscious when she went out clothes shopping with her daughter.

Lastly, one of my dearest friends had one of those stomach bands put on. She's morbidly obese, and felt that this was the only way she could lose the weight. So far, she's lost 40lbs in 6 months. Like gastric bypass, it's a starvation method of losing weight, so she's losing her hair and has low energy.

In the first case, I completely understand why she did it -- it was a quality of life issue. She does have body image issues, but she is careful not to let it get too much the best of her. The worst side effect of her surgery was not being able to breast feed when she had her children. It bugged her with the first one, but she got over it fairly quickly.

In the second case, while I think the reasons were spurious, her choice had its own consequences -- she's having surgery again this summer to correct problems resulting from the first surgery. Due to stress, she lost 20lbs that she didn't really need to lose, and now you can see the saline implants right under the skin. She's having the implants replaced with silicon. It's not a choice I would have made, but she states outright that she knows it was pure vanity, but it wasn't to make her look better to everyone in general -- she already looked really good and knew it. She wanted to look good to her husband and to her daughter, and most of all to herself. I couldn't argue with that reasoning -- it's why I wear dresses sometimes.

In the last case, I fear for my friend. Her obesity stems from an extremely difficult childhood. She medicates with food and inactivity. Those problems will not go away simply because she loses weight and becomes thin. A study came out not too long ago that found that gastric bypass patients often suffered extreme depression a year or so after they hit their goal weight. Having lost all the weight, in a year or so, it hit them that becoming thin didn't solve or change the problems that drove them to overeat in the first place. I suspect that my friend will be one of those also. It is very hard to watch, because to be totally honest, I never even noticed her weight. She's such a vibrant, lovely, loving person, I just didn't see that she was obese. When she told me she was having the surgery, I was so shocked I blurted out, "But you're not fat enough to need anything like that!". She looked at me like I had lost my mind.

So I guess how I feel is that if the motivation is quality of life, to feel less self-conscious about whatever it is, then I don't have a problem with it. I don't know if I could do it, but if it doesn't harm them too much, it's their money. I think, however, that where the motivation is to gain external affirmation, to solve problems that might be better addressed by a psychologist, or to bow to the pressure of someone who thinks you should get this or that done, it's a HUGE mistake.

That said, my guilty pleasure is Extreme Makeovers. I find it fascinating in morbid sort of way. The Swan, however, is repugnant.
 

---

Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
 

quote:

---

Mmmm. Men with huge wings...

---

You know what they say about the size of a guy's wings...
 

---

Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
 
So, what about a guys with wings versus a flying croc?
 

---

Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
 
I think it depends on whether or not the croc also has Improved Grab.
 

---

Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
 
To everyone who said "hi," "hi" back. You still my hizzoes.

Thanks for posting your thoughts, guys. So, it's pretty much boiling down to the fact that plastic surgery has as much character building potential as bondo on a wrecked car and, really, it doesn't look all that great when it's been done, anyhoo.

I can see that.

However, it does seem that saying it's unequivocally a bad idea is a gut reaction. Cosmetic surgery is something that could be judged on a case by case basis, and that would be more reasonable, right?

btw, Dan - I have to admit, I don't necessarily agree that altering your outtards for the better will not help you with your innards. Anecdotally, I can say that feeling better about the way I look, which HAS altered over the last ten years, has been very helpful for me, all around. But maybe there's another undefined line of being unable to tell which is the cause and which is the effect between looking better and feeling better. And maybe cosmetic surgery takes away that natural progression, which stunts both.

But, boy howdy, would it have saved me some time and thousands of dollars of money wasted on unflattering clothes and ineffectual beauty products.

[ April 10, 2004, 12:36 AM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
 

---

Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
 

quote:

---

On the other hand, I think something that our racially diverse society should be ashamed for promoting is a universal standard of beauty. Think about it - even famous actresses of minority races; Halle Berry, Lucy Liu - have European facial structures and slim, girlish builds.

---

quote:

---

What's considered to be beautiful changes way too often in society

---

quote:

---

Beauty, the appearance of what is beautiful, is a social construct.

---

To a certain extent I disagree with all these statements. There have been studies across all cultures that have tested what these cultures deem beautiful in a face. The participants were shown pictures of different faces and asked to decide which faces were most attractive. The majority of the faces that were chosen as most attractive fit the classic face mold - the faces were symmetrical, they fit certain proportions of nose width to mouth width, the eyes were spaced apart a certain amount proportional to their face, etc.

These findings seem to indicate that facial beauty is not a social construct, but is an evolutionary adaptation that most of us have. It has not changed very often (these evolutionary things take a long time in humans - damn those long gestation cycles and lifespans!). That certain type of face may be an outward indicator of healthy genes or some other evolutionary advantage.

That said, determining beauty by weight is a social construct. There are some cultures who view being very obese as extremely attractive. Perhaps because in those cultures the only way you could become corpulent would be if you were very successful and had enough surplus to indulge in eating excessively. Yet today we consider obesity as a very serious health problem. Wouldn't evolution have led us to only like proportionally shaped people? The thing is, it's only recently (in evolutionary terms) that we haven't been walking everywhere and getting more exercise. It's possible to be fat and be fit. It's just that our sedentary lifestyles today make it very unlikely, and the kinds of unhealthy foods easily available are more abundant now. Which makes being obese a larger health problem currently.

There has been some evidence that eating less allows you to live longer. I want to speculate that exposure to different toxins and free radicals in foods causes you to age faster, but I have no evidence. But you need regular exercise to live longer as well, and more food is needed to give you more enrgy to exercise. There might be some middle ground which allows you to live the longest.

I have no ideas about fashion and beauty. I heard fashion was cyclical.

There are lots of things that have been said that I agree with - but I'll try to say something new. We see tons more people than we meet and talk with. We probably judge most of them. The only basis we have to judge the people we see but do not meet is their appearance. Maybe their smell as well. Sometimes in the case of public figures we have articles in the media to help us judge. Since so many judgements are based on appearances is it any wonder we place such an emphasis on beauty?

From a psychological standpoint, I would speculate that it is more likely for us to want to engage in conversation with those we consider attractive in appearance than with those who are less attractive, assuming that their appearance is all we know about them. That's simple conditioning. It's not politically correct. Hmmm, now I want to find a thread about political correctness...
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
I dunno. I saw a program awhile back about what humans find attractive. They said that the answers were so varied, that the only common aspect they could find was that attractive=perceived health and youth. What signified health and youth varied greatly from culture to culture.

And looking at art, it seems that what is deemed beautiful does change over time. Before this last century, we know of no Caucasian culture that valued sun-tanned skin or skinny hips. Also, apparently in centuries past, the only European women portrayed as large-breasted were peasant women. Royalty was portrayed as small-breasted.

Also, look at the features accentuated by make-up in just this century. Compare the 20's, the 40's, the 80's. Think of female eyebrows. Then, look at the faces of the women in Renaissance paintings. The faces are amazingly similar, but I don't see faces that look much like that today.

Do standards of beauty change over time? From what I have seen, yes. A lot.

Edit: Many times I have joked that I would have been quite a foxy lady a few centuries ago. Not so much by today's standards of beauty.

[ April 10, 2004, 06:12 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
I've seen the studies JNBS is talking about and he is correct. While the ornamentation may change, the basic body type and facial ideal does not.
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
And from the studies I have seen, that is not correct.
 

---

Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
 
Note: I never said anything about skin color ("sun-tanned skin") or body type ("the basic body type," "small-breasted," "skinny hips"), although I did say that determining beauty by weight is a social construct.

I will also say that basing standards of beauty on old paintings is a little silly. A lot of the older paintings were commissioned mostly by royalty, and royalty can certainly be ugly. And it is a very small percentage of the people deciding which paintings are being commisioned. Then later, paintings began to be commissioned by the increasingly wealthy middle class, like in the Netherlands area, where the Dutch masters began doing portraits for the merchant class. Again, people can be ugly. I am certain I'm leaving out a lot of art history - I am not an art historian. You cannot look at paintings and assume only beautiful things were painted. What you can measure is people's reactions to pictures and paintings - unfortunately we don't have that data from the older time periods.

I disagree with saying someone is "correct" in this debate. This is not a black-and-white, you're-with-us-or-against-us issue.
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
Good point, this is about as subjective an argument as you can get. And also, good point that royalty was doing a lot of the commisioning and they may very well have been ugly.

I have heard others make the point that since a lot of people did not know what the famous individual looked like, the model for the portrait may very well have been someone other than the rich person, someone, say, a bit more attractive.

And I still don't think that the rich/royal commisioning the paintings explains the proliferance of a very similar look. I think this is strong evidence that it represented a standard or ideal of beauty. I am an artist, and I tend to draw what I think is most beautiful or appealing to me. That is not to say that artists will not paint what is ugly, but artist tend to idealize. You may think that the image portrayed isn't very attractive, but I am strongly convinced that the people of the day thought those pale, pasty, chubby ladies were the epitomy of beauty! Why paint a nude woman you think is ugly? That goes against reason.
 

---

Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
 
You reference "pale pasty chubby women." I have never said anything about skin color or weight as a standard of beauty not changing very often. In fact it might have. My point is merely that standards of facial beauty have not changed frequently. And that is the extent to which I disagreed with certain posts.
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
I did talk about their faces. All my life as I have looked at paintings around certain eras, I thought, "My goodness! They all look the same!" What's more, I have never seen someone that (to me) looked like that.

I also talked about the use of make-up in different recent decades to accentuate different features of the face. At times, small, pouty, rosebud lips were deemed most attractive. What was attractive on eyebrows has varied quite a bit. During the 60s and 70s when less make-up was worn, large eyes were particularly important. It is true that symmetry and roundness of the "baby-face" look tend to be important, but those are pretty general attributes to say the least.

Edit: Oh, and I don't have any clue why, but ancient Japanese thought putting two dots on a woman's forehead above her eyes was so incredibly beautiful. What's that about?

[ April 10, 2004, 07:07 PM: Message edited by: beverly ]
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
Here ya go. Venus , the epitomy of beauty. I'll bet most Playboy centerfolds of any decade have a different bust to hips ratio. If you look at the website this comes from, looking at the myriad of nude women painted around this era, you will find this ideal body type again and again. This is what they found beautiful. She would not be considered so hot today.
 

---

Posted by Stan the man (Member # 6249) on :
 
Most of the models, especially Michaelangelo's, were males. That is mostly why the bust to hips ratio is so oft. Try taking a male and painting him as a female. Not too hard these days, but I bet it was a challenge then.
 

---

Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
 
Hmmmm, that would explain some of it. I was aware of that with his sculptures, but I didn't know about the paintings.
 

---

Posted by Stan the man (Member # 6249) on :
 
It is something I read a looong time ago. my accuracy could be off.
 

---

Posted by Mr.T (Member # 6440) on :
 
Now whas all dis jimmer-jamma 'bout? You all betta cut dis out right now or Immagonna throw you helluvafah!
 

---

Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
 

quote:

---

Edit: Oh, and I don't have any clue why, but ancient Japanese thought putting two dots on a woman's forehead above her eyes was so incredibly beautiful. What's that about?

---