[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: rockerbiff ]

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: lagatta ]

OK so its not a deep meaningful question, but it is a legitimate one.

If someone you knew had some kind of cosmetic breast augmentationprior to which they considered themselves a feminist, could they legitimately still consider themselves a feminist ? Moreover, would you consider them a feminist ?

On the other hand [so to speak] the functionality of the breasts as an attractant are greatly increased with a succesful breast augmentation.

I can't claim to know a lot about feminist theory, but I do have considerable experience with the amputee thing. I am attempting the analogy in order to translate in to something I can grasp as a concept.

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: rockerbiff ]

To me, any question on body modification is a question on the person's agency. I have to give the owner of the body in question full sovereignty over it, but there are also very compelling critiques of the degree of agency one can have within the world. If your interest in the subject is genuine, my main understanding comes from the books, Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature by Donna Haraway and Body Fascism by Brian Ponger. But both left me more confused than when I started.

I'll go a step further and say whoever calls themselves a feminist can do so. What I or anyone else thinks about Person A's identification with feminism is irrelevant.

Anyone who can get up and walk, by whatever means, has just prevented her/his lifespan from decreasing substantially. The life expectancy of people who can't walk goes down immediately, simply because of what happens to internal organs when the body is not regularly stretched out.

While I value any woman's agency most highly of all, I also feel responsible as a feminist to continue to argue against the sleazy propaganda that works to make many women feel unnecessarily self-conscious about their bodies.

Also, this just occurred to me:

quote:

---

the feminist code

---

There's also the question of how unregulated all plastic surgery seems to be in North America at the moment. Apparently, any MD can hang out a shingle and start fooling around in semi-qualified fashion. Women have died from liposuction, eg. At the very least, women should know this.

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
And there's an ethical problem, too, attached to any surgery. Isn't it true, brebis noire (one of our resident medicos), that there are risks attached to any adventure with anaesthetic? I mean, given the risks, it seems inevitable that at least a few women are going to die for the sake of getting breast implants. Should people who took the Hippocratic Oath be engaged in such practices?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Apparently, any MD can hang out a shingle and start fooling around in semi-qualified fashion.

---

I don't think that's true, skdadl.

College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario - Policy - Requirements when Changing Scope of Practice

quote:

---

College Policy

A physician who wishes to change the scope of his/her clinical practice to an area of medicine in which the physician does not have appropriate training or recent experience must undergo a College-assisted assessment of knowledge, judgement and skills before beginning to practise in the new area of focus or specialization.

The physician who wishes to change the scope of his/her clinical practice must contact the College and arrange for an assessment.

The assessment would involve, at a minimum, providing proof that he or she had completed appropriate training for the new area of focus or specialization.

If educational enhancements are recommended as a result of the assessment, the College will facilitate the process, ensuring the educational enhancement has been undertaken. The College will receive a copy of the final report.

The length of time the physician would need to spend in an educational program or period of training would not be pre-determined but would be dependent upon the outcome of the assessment.

It is the College's expectation that the physician will not begin practising in the new area of specialization until after he or she has successfully completed the College's assessment process and has received College approval to do so.

---

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

This policy affects all physicians who wish to change the scope of their clinical practice such that the new area of practice falls outside the area of medicine in which the physician is educated and experienced.

Examples of changing scopes of practice include: a family physician who wishes to perform cosmetic surgical procedures, or a specialist, such as an orthopaedic surgeon, who wishes to enter practice in primary care.

---

It has been my understanding for some time that "specializing" in cosmetic surgery doesn't require much. But of course, ISTBC (I sit to be corrected).

I mean, they could do it in contravention of their regulatory College, but then again, anyone can break rules as long as they don't get caught. And doctors would be risking their license to do so.

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

At least once a month I am approached by a male or female in regarding to locating surgeons who are willing to perform cosmetic amputations; the level of which can vary from toes to a full leg.

As an example...

If a woman chooses to have her foot removed for cosmetic purposes does this cross a line or should I be helping this person achieve her goal ?

Some background on the subject of Apotemnophilia is HERE

There is very little media or public pressure for people to have limbs removed, however some are willing to go to great lengths in order to have it done, lying on a railway track or putting a 12 guage to one's knee are but a few methods I have documented examples of.

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: rockerbiff ]

If there is one thing I have learned about feminism it is that a woman's body is her own to do with as she see's fit - or is this a misconception ? However, a society places limitations on that, breast augmentation maybe acceptable to some, but most would agree that removing a limb crosses a line.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RP.:
How is this "Discuss[ing] feminist issues from a pro-feminist point of view"?

---

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: rockerbiff ]

[ 15 July 2005: Message edited by: rockerbiff ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Until someone comes along to correct me,

---

Well, if you don't accept the stated policy of the regulatory body that licenses physicians and surgeons, then I'm not sure how anyone else would be able to correct you. I mean, sometimes newspapers get stuff wrong, and don't do their research.

On the other hand, if the newspaper was reporting about people who are violating this policy and haven't been caught yet, then that's something else. But that doesn't mean that the policy doesn't exist or that it isn't enforced when it comes to the attention of the licensing board. And as a potential patient, it's easy to find out, if you're considering cosmetic surgery, whether or not the doctor is licensed to do so - I think it's as easy as one phone call to the regulatory College. Or even a physician search on the web site:

An example of a doctor's record - scroll down to see the area of specialty.

[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
I mean, given the risks, it seems inevitable that at least a few women are going to die for the sake of getting breast implants. Should people who took the Hippocratic Oath be engaged in such practices?
[ 13 July 2005: Message edited by: skdadl ]

---

There are definite risks associated with any use of anaesthetics. Anyone who downplays the risks is acting ignorantly. There are ways to minimise the risks, like getting a blood test, an EKG - but those will only point out that you might be at greater risk for complications. One would hope that doctors are taking every possible precaution with every patient.

Micheline Charest was only 51 when she died last year of cardiac arrest during what was apparently a prolonged cosmetic surgery procedure (from what I remember, she was having several done at the same time.)

As for certification, I'm not sure how it's accomplished here in Quebec, but I had a doctor friend who apprenticed with a doctor who did cosmetic surgery - he was mainly working on varicose veins, injecting them with something to make them die off and disappear - but he got bored and went back to regular practice.

I've also heard of American women (this was on an ABC special, I think) who contact doctors from outside the country who do procedures at very high discounts. They do many of the preliminaries through the Internet then travel to have the actual procedure done. I bet we won't be getting any proper stats from that little market.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alix:
To specialize in cosmetic surgery, one would probably have to go through the Plastic Surgery residency program, which is 5 years (I think. Could be longer.) There are very few plastic surgery residency programs across Canada.

Anyone already practising would probably have to undergo some kind of equivalent.

---

That makes sense to me. I think the process to add a specialty to your license is not just a rubber stamp. I would be surprised if they didn't take each application on a case-to-case basis and thoroughly scrutinize the training and experience a person has, and then tell the person what further training they need, whether coursework or experience under the supervision of someone who has that specialty.

quote:

---

If a woman chooses to have her foot removed for cosmetic purposes does this cross a line or should I be helping this person achieve her goal ? Some background on the subject of Apotemnophilia is HERE

---

I do think that the risks are diminished and that's unethical.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hailey:
I think that people are free to have whatever surgery that they want.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rockerbiff:
... the functionality of the breasts as an attractant are greatly increased with a succesful breast augmentation.

---

Speaking for myself, I tend to find people more attactive in their natural state. Attaching bags of silicone or saline to the front of a woman doesn't increase her attractiveness to me.

That being said, I don't think it's anyone's place to judge particular women's choices. I do think we should be concerned about health implications and try to ensure that no one, regardless of their motivation undergoes a medical procedure that could make them sick or even kill them.

quote:

---

There's a bar in Edmonton that (according to my sister anyway) always hires very thin women and then makes it an (informal, but nonetheless enforced) requirement that they get breast augmentation.

---

quote:

---

There's a bar in Edmonton that (according to my sister anyway) always hires very thin women and then makes it an (informal, but nonetheless enforced) requirement that they get breast augmentation.

---

Breast augmentation and other types of augmentive surgeries often arise out of the need to be seen as more sexually attractive, surprisingly many cosmetic limb amputations are performed for exactly the same reason.

In the limited number of studies in this area, sexual stimulation and cosmetic amputation are tied in together.

quote:

---

Originally posted by EFA:
Rockerbiff wrote:

I read something on this not that long ago and I just could not wrap my mind around it. The "disease" is wishing to remove a limb and the "treatment" is granting the wish. Isn't that in violation of the Hippocratic oath? Does anyone know how common this is?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dee:
I had heard something similar about a bar in calagary. Only there it was not a requirement but encouraged to the point where the bar would finance the cost if the server wanted to get it done.

---

That's basically the same as the place in Edmonton (they could even be owned by the same person, I think he has a number of establishments in both cities). While not a "requirement" per se, servers where informally very strongly encouraged to do it and the bar would finance it. I think it was likely a de facto requirement because from what I heard the pressure was great and it's not hard to find a reason to fire someone from a service job.

quote:

---

What about me?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cartman:
I was at Hooters simply because ...

---

Hee hee. Reminds me of my favorite Baptist joke, the final line of which could probably apply to progressives, too:

Three Great Religious Truths:

quote:

---

Originally posted by shaolin:

Great article Audra!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by audra trower williams:
Thanks! Heh. I love babble. I can be like "hey look it's a picture and article about my rack" and no one gets all het up.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rockerbiff:
The psychological need to remove a limb is more common than you think ... In the limited number of studies in this area, sexual stimulation and cosmetic amputation are tied in together.

---

The explanations are varied as the people who share this phenomenon. One man told me he was paying back his parents for years of sexual abuse, then he put a 12 gauge shot gun to his knee and pulled the trigger.

I tend to throw in "body modification" in to one big category. The mildest and most accpetable forms can be tatoos or ear piercings and breast augmentation. The more extreme cases and far less acceptable are cosmetic amputations. One thing we do know is that body modifcation is cross cultural in nature, we've all seen pics of African women who use rings to extend their necks and place plates in their lips to modify their appearance.

It's a rather bizarre world, strange indeed but far more common than people think.

Another interesting issue is acceptance. In the amputee world I live in, once a realised "wannabee" announces his or her method of entry in to the amputee world [ie how they became an amputee] they are often chastised and socially rejected by those who enter the amputee world via more traditional means [accidents or disease].

Also there is a great difference in acceptance based on gender for example http://groups.yahoo.com/group/women_admirers_and_amputee_men

[ 15 July 2005: Message edited by: rockerbiff ]

Also, I know people will amputate perfectly healthy hands and arms and feet and legs. Also, castration isn't unheard of. But I wonder: does anyone ever put their own eyes out? Wouldn't you expect, if it's possible to have someone else's hand, that it would be just as possible to have someone else's eyes? Or tongue?

How do you explain that one in the office

"Hi bob, what did u do this weekend?"

"Well i poked out my eye cuz it had the devils mark. And you?"

quote:

---

Originally posted by audra trower williams:
What about me?

---

quote:

---

One thing we do know is that body modifcation is cross cultural in nature, we've all seen pics of African women who use rings to extend their necks and place plates in their lips to modify their appearance.

---

Women do not dress for men, they do not arrange their bodies for men, they do all of this for themselves. You can make an argument that these women are operating under a "false consciousness" of some sort, from a patriarchal culture. But I've never met anyone who framed her choice to diet, to augment her breasts or anything else as, "I'm doing this for men." When I chose to pierce by bellybutton, it was because I thought it looked cool, not because I thought any stupid man would be turned on by it. I mean, if all body modification were for men, that would imply that lesbians never modify their bodies. Clearly, that's not the case. The nature of the particular modification is of course culturally influenced, which is why the African and Asian ones are different from European and North American ones.

[ 16 July 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]

quote:

---

When I read your article, audra, the social democrat in me kept expecing at least some mention of the financial aspects. Did OHIP cover these, er, ... twin procedures?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by audra trower williams:
Exactly! But then they ended up paying for the whole thing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kurichina:
That's not true, and furthermore, it's an assertion that rests on patriarchal assumptions about women's choices and agency.

Women do not dress for men, they do not arrange their bodies for men, they do all of this for themselves. [ 16 July 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]

---

There are over three billion women in the world; I'm sure some of them base their decisions about clothes, or in other appearence choices, based in part on what men like (in large part, in some cases, in my experience.)

Surgery is traumatic -- highly traumatic to the body. General anesthetic is dangerous. Is it ever justified for a physician to undertake such risks for their patient with no health benifits to the patient? People have the right to control their bodies, but doctors have a responsibility to do no harm.

On the other hand, suppose a burn victim, or a person born with a cleft palate, are functionally normal but want to look better? In that context it is easy to recognize the pain of ugliness, and see a positive value in helping a patient more closely approximate a society's ideal of beauty. And if we recognize it there, what about a person who is plain homely? Would they not enjoy the same benifits, and, to a lesser degree, suffer the same hardships, if they were refused help? I don't want to be too quick to judge what seems to be frivolous treatment. A lot of good, necessary medical treatment -- like psychiatry -- was at one time denounced as frivolous.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rsfarrell:
You may deride those women; you may feel they act out of low self-esteem or some other motive; but they certainly exist. The impulse to idealize the character of a traditionally abused group is natural; the temptation to generalize is great: but in this case I think it leads to an unrealistically rigid description of women's choices.

---

I didn't deride them. I stated that they do not match with any experience, either direct or read about that I know.

I'm not idealizing the character of anyone. I'm trying to correct for an even more rigid and patronizing image of women's choices that suggest that we have no agency and cannot think for ourselves.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kurichina:

I didn't deride them. I stated that they do not match with any experience, either direct or read about that I know.

I'm not idealizing the character of anyone. I'm trying to correct for an even more rigid and patronizing image of women's choices that suggest that we have no agency and cannot think for ourselves.

I *do* think for myself, thank you very much.

---

I'm sure you do: but you don't think for all women.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kurichina:
Well, pardon me all to hell, but I think I'll trust my own experiences (and those related to me by my friends) more than what some man asserts that I and other women are thinking (or not thinking as the case may be). I don't speak for all women, to be sure, but I can at least speak for one, which is more than you can say.

---

This whole thread was started on a stupid assumption (the so-called "feminist code") and is ending on an anti-feminist note where instead of women sharing their own experiences and relating them, we have others deigning to speak for us. You know, if EFA, has explained why she thought most body modifications were made for the benefit of men, or why she thought that women are framing their choices that way (if I'm reading her comment correctly that I was responding to in the post that you apparently feels is so rigid, etc.), I would've been forced to consider that carefully. Instead you come and slap me down after reading the experiences I relate much more widely then they were intended to be read. I stand by my authority to speak, at least, for myself as a woman and not be told by someone else why I make one choice or another about how I want to arrange my body.

[ 17 July 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kurichina:
I *never* said I telepathically know what all women are thinking, but neither does anyone else.

This whole thread was started on a stupid assumption (the so-called "feminist code") and is ending on an anti-feminist note where instead of women sharing their own experiences and relating them, we have others deigning to speak for us. You know, if EFA, has explained why she thought most body modifications were made for the benefit of men, or why she thought that women are framing their choices that way (if I'm reading her comment correctly that I was responding to in the post that you apparently feels is so rigid, etc.), I would've been forced to consider that carefully. Instead you come and slap me down after reading the experiences I relate much more widely then they were intended to be read. I stand by my authority to speak, at least, for myself as a woman and not be told by someone else why I make one choice or another about how I want to arrange my body.

[ 17 July 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]

---

I'd say you're the one doing the slapping; coming out swinging at no more provocation than my sharing my own experiences and thoughts on the matter. For my part, I have never denied the importence of your perspective, only the universal authority you appeared to demand for it.

Your effort to label a discussion "anti-feminist" is in line with these same bullying tactics.

About the only extreme makeover I'd be interested in would be the one where they regrow lost legs and do a before and after. Until that happens and they dump the cosmetic makeovers, I'm doing all I can to advise my fellow amputees from NOT taking part in these shows.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rsfarrell:
For me, though, as a paramedic and an aspiring doctor, I have a gut reaction when I see these surgeries on the now-popular makeover shows. They turn my stomach. Invasive surgery on healthy people revolts me. I would never want to do it. (They won't miss me in plastic surgery; I have a terrible memory for faces and can't draw so much as a straight line.) For my wife, who enjoys these shows, there's a fantasy of rebirth as a new, chosen self; a very American preoccupation. It's no fun watching them with me, though; I see a healthy person intubated with their breast cut open at the nipple and I want to wring someone's neck.

---

Especially if it annoys Rockerbiff that she might.

I've known two women that have had this procedure in the last 12 months. Does anyone know the statistics for breast reduction surgeries compared breast augmentation sugeries ?

Can Rockerbiff have a brain augmentation?

quote:

---

Originally posted by rockerbiff:
How about breast reductions ?

I've known two women that have had this procedure in the last 12 months. Does anyone know the statistics for breast reduction surgeries compared breast augmentation sugeries ?

What is the perception of breast reduction compared to breast augmentation ?

---

When you support such a surgery, one that is based on someone changing their body purely for the pleasure of a specific group of people and, more importantly, when you support something that is dangerous and potentially fatal (think breast cancer) to only ONE gender, yes, I believe it is against feminist values.

quote:

---

When you support such a surgery, one that is based on someone changing their body purely for the pleasure of a specific group of people and, more importantly, when you support something that is dangerous and potentially fatal (think breast cancer) to only ONE gender, yes, I believe it is against feminist values.

---

quote:

---

And think of why womyn want them???

---

Because their lesbian partners want it too, something I have seen in several cases.

Its a individuals right to choose for whatever purpose. To please themselves, another man or woman, whatever

quote:

---

Ask yourself why someone isn't comfortable with their breasts? It is because this patriarchal misogynist society tells us we are not beautiful, they tell us just what we must change to be beautiful. That is not my choice. It is not my choice to believe that I am not sufficiently attractive.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by marcella:
I think it is unfeminist and would never support a "feminist" having one. I know that is not "third-wave" of me, but that's reality. Breast augmentations demonstrate a womyn's desire to fulfill the current beauty ideal, which I view as a staple concern in today's world. The theory that womyn should alter their bodies in order to fit what men percieve as attractive is against feminist theory. Secondly, breast augmentation is dangerous and unhealthy. For anyone to support and entire gender partaking in a dangerous and very serious act is degrading to that gender and therefore unfeminist. ...

When you support such a surgery, one that is based on someone changing their body purely for the pleasure of a specific group of people and, more importantly, when you support something that is dangerous and potentially fatal (think breast cancer) to only ONE gender, yes, I believe it is against feminist values.

I know many of you disagree, that's fine, but I disagree with the third wave belief of choice and everyone can do anything they want...I believe that leads to very destructive behaviour and essentially disproves any of womyn's previous struggles. You are then accepting oppression under the guise of it being your choice. Womyn wouldn't want breast implants if men hadn't created them and told us we want them. And think of why womyn want them???

---

Marcella, I wish I had your eloquence! You have put things so well, it's amazing. I hope some of the men on babble will read your messages closely and think hard about. And I agree with you that in recent years some more fashionable feminists have effectively betrayed some of the most important feminist realizations.

I have been repeatedly ridiculed on these boards for pointing out the obvious, that the media and Madison Ave have succeeded in brainwashing millions of women into "wanting" and "choosing" things that are clearly not in their interests, such as thong bikinis which are clearly an example of pornographic fashion, high heels which are physically unhealthy, and porn itself, which some babblers claim women can consume and enjoy if they want. To some people here, it's an offensive notion to point out that millions have been brainwashed. What do you say to that kind of politically correct denial that simply takes today's fashionable blasse attitude as gospel?

Here are two links on the subject on breast implants that may help to further extend the discussion. In one, some bars and niteclubs in BC have been offering breast implants as prizes, but the doctors in BC have decided that it's unethical for their members to perform these surgeries. I am not normally in the habit of thanking well-to-do doctors for being socially responsible, but this time I think they have lived up to the challenge of they Hypocratic oath.

Doctors warn about breast implant contests

In the second story, from the Guardian newspaper in England, we see a piece by an author who isn't afraid to say that porn is ubiquitous and that it's even brainwashing his 12 year old son.

Thanks to pop culture, my 12-year-old son's life revolves around porn

[ 24 July 2005: Message edited by: MasterDebator ]

[ 24 July 2005: Message edited by: MasterDebator ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MasterDebator:
I have been repeatedly ridiculed on these boards for pointing out the obvious, that the media and Madison Ave have succeeded in brainwashing millions of women into "wanting" and "choosing" things that are clearly not in their interests, such as thong bikinis which are clearly an example of pornographic fashion, high heels which are physically unhealthy, and porn itself, which some babblers claim women can consume and enjoy if they want.

---

Now that I've returned to reading this thread I see a bit more about your post on the issue of "choice" and third wave feminism.

I concur with you about breast augmentation and I've read Audre Lorde. I have something else to throw out to this thread:

What if women took all the time, energy and resources that we do in thinking about what we look like, liking and disliking different parts of our bodies (for a vast number of reasons), buying crap because our hair, odour and other functions are considered "unfeminine", never mind the "policing" we do of other women's bodies and clothes, and instead took that energy and put it to the positive task of dismantling this frikkin' patriarchal misogynist society to make it more equitable for all?