UK boob jobs double in 3 years

[Army Of Me]

Just heard on radio 1 - 26000 boob jobs so far this year and double from 3 years ago.

Sound bite interview - woman saying her boobs looked "deformed" all hollow and flat and took out a loan to pay for them - I wonder what she was comparing herself to? Hmmmmmmmm. I will ponder that for a long time.

This really is getting scary now.

[sunnysmiles]

[Army Of Me]

For UK listeners, I heard it on the colin and edith show on the news - I know the news is separate to the show, but I emailed edith direct - here is what I said - (tried to keep it brief and idiot-friendly).


"That boob job story 26,000 last year and twice as many as three years ago - the woman saying her boobs were deformed - as compared to what?

I blame all the saturation of the market with these images of impossibly perfect women on lad's mags and in women's mags too. Big Brother is guilty too.,

This is just another, much more dangerous and expensive, body image disorder, anorexia has nothing on this one.

As a woman, you should comment on this - it's becoming a serious problem."


I should've asked her to play "Barbie Girl" by Aqua.

[delphyne]

26,000?

Oh my God.

[soopermouse]

26,000?

Oh my God.

am I horrible person for thinking " how many of these were done on the NHS, taking money from the people with real medical needs"??

[delphyne]

No you're not. One of the women on Big Brother this year has had a boob job paid for on the NHS. I can't blame her because she's an ex-anorexic who still looks like she has a lot of problems, but the doctors that agreed to do it need to be struck off.

[sunnysmiles]

Im sorry what is NHS?

[delphyne]

National Health Service. Healthcare funded by taxes so it is free at the point of service for UK citizens. There is always controversy about which treatments people are allowed to have because of limited funds. Cosmetic surgery usually isn't seen as something that the NHS should provide but it appears they are making an exception for breast enlargment.

[Army Of Me]

The only breast surgery that should be allowed on the NHS are reductions (breasts that are so large they cause physical problems such as back pain and skin irritations etc), and reconstructions after cancer. I don't care how anorexic a woman is, giving her a boob job paid for by our taxes, is WRONG and not the answer to her problem, and does not address what's really feeding this issue. Any breast surgery on the NHS, other than reductions and cancer reconstructs are WRONG!

I'm afraid 26000 was the figure quoted in the news article - if the NHS is funding ANY of these, we have a serious fight on our hands, as rather than try to deal with what is feeding this new wave of women's body-image issue (it's not just about anorexia or bulimia anymore), such as the high visibility of breast-implanted women in pics, on the internet, on mag covers, and in Big Brother, the doctors choose to bury their heads in the sand, have the pressure that's been put on women then pushed on to the doctor, to stuff silicone into the "deformed, deficient" breasts. This is really serious - women are putting themselves under more financial pressure (on top of the psychological pressure), trying to pay for an increasingly impossible body standard, and if the NHS is funding some of this, they have a serious problem, as the pressure and demand is going to be much much worse soon.

As far as one of the BB constestants having hers paid for on the NHS, if you are referring to nikki, I think I overheard her in a conversation with Aislene, comparing implant stories, that they both said they paid about £4000. It's obvious nikki has anorexia and food issues, she's always exercising, always eating, and always complaining about being cold - she has no body fat and although not emaciated, her implants look like grapefruit halves sometimes, and this will only get worse over time - so off to the doc for another operation, potentially paid for by guess who - the taxpayers. Her family have loads of money so if they are abusing the NHS like this they should be fined and made to give the money back for someone who really needs it - but then they need all the money they can get, apparently, for keeping her warm and her gym membership.

As for "lady" susie - she had to turn to stripping to get the money to pay for a 2nd boob job, as the first one went wrong - one higher than the other - but no one ever seems to mention this dirty little fact about her past (oh, oops, I forgot, we are supposed to think stripping is empowering and enlightened,not dirty - my mistake) - but she now has a millionaire hubby to pay to keep her in "barbie" condition - she's always infuriatingly fiddling with her hair - 2 reasons for this, the first (my theory only - not sure about this) is that she has had a face-lift and likes to keep her hair hiding scars, 2nd reason, she is so conscious of the camera on her and has to always have her hair looking just-so. She also really works that collagen implanted pout doesn't she? She is headed for one big crisis when her age really catches up with her, as are all surgery addicts, as there's only so much surgery can address. (look at the jackson family).

Isn't it ironic that the work and the industries that these boob job obsessives need to get into to get the money for the surgery, are the very things that put the pressure on women to have this surgery? Duh.

As I have said before in here, it is believed that many BB contestants (female) are assessed for their porn potential before being chosen, and many, who have borderline boob issues before going in, tip over into going for the surgery after coming out - they are offered modelling jobs for the lad's mags, cuz all the guys wanna see 'em naked, preferably with bigger tits. One theory is that BB and the lad's mags have a symbiotic relationship going on behind the scenes. Some of the "promo" girl contestants (hookers, trust me) have already had pics done before going into the house, and the ones that haven't, get published after they come out (of course, having had the obligatory enlargement).

As for M-cup Lea, she should just shut up when she starts her whining and crying about how people "booed" her when she went into the house, and how much grief she gets - well what does she expect having made herself look like she does? She's a disgrace to herself and to other women. As for her claims that she is a "nice" person, she's a "real" person (what?) and sets herself up as being so misunderstood - bollox - anyone who does that to herself and allows her image to be exposed for weeks on national tv, especially knowing that it will be seen by impressionable, little girls, whose minds are already poisoned by people like jordan, is NOT a nice person, and she is certainly not "real". What's "real" is her delusion and her fake manipulating insecurity. She has set up the situation, then whines when people express their disapproval - she should just shut up with her complaining - if I saw her in the street, I'd boo her, no probs.

[soopermouse]

funny- i feel sorry for them, they are just blinded victims.

[Army Of Me]

victims? they are creating more victims by their example so my heart doesn't bleed at all.

[soopermouse]

victims? they are creating more victims by their example so my heart doesn't bleed at all.

true, but they are victims of the system, and they, like the rest of the victims, perpetrate it.

let us be honest, there isn't much help in this country for working class girls. They come out of college with no qualifications, further education is expensive as a motherfucker and the only ways out they can see is either getting pregnant or becoming a "model". the media is intoxicating them with unattainable ideals, there is no real strong female model in place... what can you expect? Conscience does not grow on trees, and in a lot of cases it will not develop by itself without positive influences.

[Army Of Me]

There are plenty of strong role models - they just aren't promoted as being so.

They perpetuation of the "glamour" industry as an option for girls is given high-profile. Otherwise perfectly intelligent girls, who have the money for further education, are dumbing themselves down. The glamour/porn industry plays specifically on female insecurity, and their need to be validated by what men think of their looks - so rich or poor, they are buying into it. Working in the industry covers a lot of bases for many women, not just money.

So there really is no excuse. They have a brain, and if used, could see thru the hypocrisy and the bullshit. There is plenty of help with further education if you are on benefits and plan it, but many women just aren't. Yeah, it's hard. But many think the glamour industry is the easy way out, which it's not in reality, so in that respect, they are "victims" of false advertising.

Sorry, I disagree that there is no help for working class women - it just does not wash. Yes, some are poor and underprivledged, but that does not account for the vast numbers who are going into this industry.

And trying to change this whole over-promotion of the wrong role models for girls is one reason why we are using this forum.

[soopermouse]

There are plenty of strong role models - they just aren't promoted as being so.

They perpetuation of the "glamour" industry as an option for girls is given high-profile. Otherwise perfectly intelligent girls, who have the money for further education, are dumbing themselves down. The glamour/porn industry plays specifically on female insecurity, and their need to be validated by what men think of their looks - so rich or poor, they are buying into it. Working in the industry covers a lot of bases for many women, not just money.


So there really is no excuse. There is plenty of help with further education if you plan it, but they aren't. Yeah, it's hard.

Sorry, but that argument does not wash. Yes, some are poor and underprivledged, but that does not account for the vast numbers who are going into this industry.

And trying to change this whole over-promotion of the wrong role models for girls is why we are using this forum.

very true and I agree.

[Army Of Me]

sorry - edited post a bit!

[soopermouse]

There are plenty of strong role models - they just aren't promoted as being so.

They perpetuation of the "glamour" industry as an option for girls is given high-profile. Otherwise perfectly intelligent girls, who have the money for further education, are dumbing themselves down. The glamour/porn industry plays specifically on female insecurity, and their need to be validated by what men think of their looks - so rich or poor, they are buying into it. Working in the industry covers a lot of bases for many women, not just money.

So there really is no excuse. They have a brain, and if used, could see thru the hypocrisy and the bullshit. There is plenty of help with further education if you are on benefits and plan it, but many women just aren't. Yeah, it's hard. But many think the glamour industry is the easy way out, which it's not in reality, so in that respect, they are "victims" of false advertising.

Sorry, I disagree that there is no help for working class women - it just does not wash. Yes, some are poor and underprivledged, but that does not account for the vast numbers who are going into this industry.

And trying to change this whole over-promotion of the wrong role models for girls is one reason why we are using this forum.

there is a comment that sums all of that up on my latest blog post.

My question is this

can anyone who loves in the civilised world escape the media?
if we cannot escape their campaigns, does it qualify as abuse?

[resisterance]

is there noone else who feels as depressed as i do at this thread?

im leaving. this is just classic women blaming crap. i cant even be arsed to argue with it. i have run out of energy on this crap, somehow no matter who is talking it always seems to be the lower class women who get the blame, particularly those who breed.

if i wanted to read this stuff id buy the Mail.

[sunnysmiles]

I agree - vg1.

If working class women who enter the 'glamour industry' aren't victims, than why are the girls who choose to mimic them victims? Why are these 'role models' not victims and yet their followers are victims? Who are we speaking for anyways?

I guess no one here's a victim - we all just choose our roles because we all want to be strippers. Obviously, if these girls "choose" to be strippers then all women choose to be strippers.

No offence Army of Me, I just don't see your point. Even if a woman has money and enters the glamour industry - why isn't she a victim of patriarchal expectations? Whether it's for celebrity/money/accolades - it hardly makes a difference - it's based on what is the current currency of status leverage or gains, and those rules aren't made by women - they are made by patriarchal institutions.

Women didn't start prostituting themselves - men wanted them to...

[CoolAunt]

I understand the views of both ArmyOfMe and sunny, the logic and reasoning behind them and believe them both to be valid. This is very similar to the first discussion that I joined at BB's board. It was about porn workers rather than glamour workers, but still very similar. I fact, it's the discussion that Delphyne mentioned in my intro thread. I leared a great deal from that discussion and my heart softened for porn workers as an outcome.

Applying what I learned from that discussion to this one, I have empathy for the glamour workers. Like ArmyOfMe, however, I can't wrap my mind around the lack of accountability that's granted to every woman who...well, to every woman, it seems. No matter what she does or what career choice she makes (not all have much choice but some do), they are not to be held accountable, in this case because men decided that women's bodies are commodities.

I'm not quite sure what "working class girl" means. It must be a British term. I assume it means young ladies whose parents don't have the money to send them to college so they must take whatever jobs available right out of high school. Is that correct? If so, that would describe me way back when. I worked at fast food restaurants and convenience stores until my early- to mid-20s when I lucked into an opportunity through an old friend. During those "would you like fries with that?" years, I really, really needed more money than I earned. I didn't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of because I couldn't afford either on what I earned. Yet I didn't take work at the local topless clubs, I didn't take up any of the subtly stated offers I received from would-be sugar daddies...heck, I didn't even rob the safes or tills of any of the restaurants or stores that I worked for. I couldn't do those things, even if they wouldn't have made me ill (topless clubs, mistress offers), even if I'd known for sure that I wouldn't have been caught (safes and tills) because I held myself accountable for my actions.

I've not made a return to holding sex workers accountable for the growth of the sex industry and how porn has managed to work itself into my life even though I'm not a user of it. Instead, I'm having difficulty understanding why no female glamour or sex worker is to ever be held accountable, not even those who truly did have choices and were aware of those choices. Nor are the glamour and sex workers who require or want more money than can be earned behind a cash register to be accountable. Yet all hetero males, even those who aren't consumers of pornstitution, don't condone the use of pornstitution, and won't befriend the men who do use it, are to be held accountable for pornstitution if his reasons for not using pornstitution aren't the "right" reasons and he doesn't follow a list of "dos" and "don'ts" that apply to all other areas of his life. No female porn worker has any bearing on the perpetuation of porn while even non-porn using men do.

Even more odd is that while women who are glamour and porn workers are not accountable for perpetuating the belief that women's bodies are for sale and are to be abused, I and other women at these boards have recently been informed that we are accountable for perpetuating those same lies because we continue to wear mascara and shave our legs. Use boobs to make money = not accountable. Use razor on legs = accountable. I doubt that my shaved arm pits have ever helped a man justify making his fantasy of rape a reality nor has it influenced a girl to work topless for a living. I can't say the same for the glamour girls and sex workers.

[sunnysmiles]

I have a friend over for dinner right now - but I will write a lengthy response to this question, as I do think it's the fundamental question that all feminists ask.

This is probably the hardest question to answer too, it took me a long time to understand why "women perpetuated their own subjugation" too...