Plastic Surgery - What say ye?

Kooli

I think there is a BIG difference between having surgery to make something abnormal look normal (e.g. a flat chest to a normal chest, a massive nose to a normal nose etc. etc.) and having surgery to make something normal into the 'ideal' (e.g. normal chest to MASSIVE chest, normal lips to a massive pout, cheek implants etc. etc.)

In the first case, it's fixing something that has probably caused this person stress for every day of their lives, and it probably WILL improve their lives a massive amount.

In the second case, I think it's more likely the case that this person has issues with their appearance that would be better treated with therapy, or have unrealistic expectations of how much surgery will change their lives.

And as for the Swan, oh my god, they all looked like clones of each other at the end. And when they do the 'before' and 'after' shots, they compare a 'before' shot of a woman in harsh lighting wearing a grey vest and no bra, no make up, hair scraped back in a ponytail, to an 'after' shot of a woman in an evening gown, full hair and make up, fake tan and soft lighting. Are they serious? The should FIRST show what a difference they can make with JUST these things and no surgery.

LadyJ

Kooli wrote:

I think there is a BIG difference between having surgery to make something abnormal look normal (e.g. a flat chest to a normal chest, a massive nose to a normal nose etc. etc.) and having surgery to make something normal into the 'ideal' (e.g. normal chest to MASSIVE chest, normal lips to a massive pout, cheek implants etc. etc.)

Tbh,I think this is where another argument begins.

I mean,I have pretty small breasts but I don't think that makes them "abnormal". What is "normal"?

I certainly don't know what defines "normal" when it comes to body parts. But I suppose everyone has their own idea of what "ideal" would be,regarding their own body.

Kooli

LadyJ wrote:

Tbh,I think this is where another argument begins.

I mean,I have pretty small breasts but I don't think that makes them "abnormal". What is "normal"?

I certainly don't know what defines "normal" when it comes to body parts. But I suppose everyone has their own idea of what "ideal" would be,regarding their own body.

I think a totally flat chest on a girl could be counted as abnormal, don't you? I don't just mean small boobs, as these can look great, and suit some girls. Most models have small boobs, so I don't think that everyone with small boobs should have a complex about it. I'm sure your breasts are lovely!!

I'm talking about features on someone that are distinctive enough (or 'abnormal' enough) to be noticed daily by everyone, and to have been a source of slagging.

For instance, someone with a massive nose was probably slagged for it regularly as a child and teenager, possibly even been commented on in the street.

But has anyone been slagged off for having 'a thin upper lip'? Or 'not-very-prominent cheekbones'? Or a chin that is slightly out of proportion to the rest of their face? These people aren't changing a part of themselves they have always hated, they are looking at what is seen as the 'ideal' (either by themselves or society), and changing any bits of their face or body to get closer to that.

I think there is a HUGE difference between those two situations. One is fixing a specific problem, the other is just trying generally to be "better looking". Its the second one that worries me.