Plastic Surgery

[worm]

There is no such thing as purely cosmetic surgery for facial disfigurement due to burns. Its basically reconstructive surgery that the likes of Simon Weston and Katie Piper (and numerous others) have had. Anything cosmetic is done non-invasively through pressure garments or conformers or silicone gels and massage. Surgery enables them to have some sort of function - to be able to close their mouths or close their eyes etc etc. We can reshape and form eye lids, or a new nose or new lips - we can't stop the skin looking like its been burned though. Trust me - its my passion and what i've spent the last 10 years working in!

[worm]

This is so interesting my brain's buzzing. A few things - Sartre's idea of the Look of the Other - as subjective beings we are free, but when we're subject to another's image of us, this objectifies us. Thus, the feminist idea of women 'being seen' as 'sex objects'. And feminists trying to avoid this by denying their sexuality.

But - and it's a big but (no pun intended!) Where does sexuality end and objectification begin? We still want to be desired and to think of ourselves as desirable. Why should women feel ashamed of wanting to be attractive to men, Isn't that part of sexuality?

The big problem I have with feminism is that, well meaning as it is, it still tries to define what women should want. It's sexist to want to stay at home and look after your children, you should want to have a career. it's sexist to want to have big boobs/wear makeup/bleach your hair, you're pandering to men's whims.

Well, maybe women want these things just because it's their choice. It's patronising to suggest they're brainless robots programmed by society. And simplistic, since there's a reciprocal relationship between people and 'culture'.

And we are all animals, albeit socialised ones. We can't mate unless we make ourselves attractive to the preferred mate.

Edited December 2, 2010 by worm

[Digi]

So you're saying that there isn't any cosmetic surgery going on?

[worm]

No.

[feral chile]

You're reducing feminism to a single autonomous entity here. There are loads of feminisms though.

For example, post modern feminists use masculinity and objectify men, as the very notion of sex (the biological type) is based upon a socially idealised image. The vagina becomes the dominant labidinal force rather than the penis.

Edited December 2, 2010 by feral chile

[worm]

Yes, but that's what I'm complaining about. feminists who look at what men do, and campaign for women to be able to do the same. They're still paying homage to the dominant (masculine) ideal - the objectification of the opposite sex.

How is that liberation?

[feral chile]

Because they are free to choose their own identity on the basis of them being a person, rather than a sexually defined object.

Edited December 2, 2010 by feral chile

[worm]

But being anti-something, by trying to posit a feminine ideal in place of a masculine ideal, is still being defined by that something.

Edited December 2, 2010 by worm

[feral chile]

It isn't feminine, it's masculine. The point is that they can choose who they want to be or how they want to express their own sexuality without it being defined by their sex. In turn, that type of person will not be defined as being so because they are male/female, but because it's who they are.

And I've no idea what you're talking about with regards to me agreeing and such like - I was simply giving you an example of a type of feminism.

What's with all this 'we' stuff?

For the record, I see culture as the projection of the human mind onto the physical environment.

[worm]

I agree people should be free to choose how they want to act without reference to their sex.

[The Nal]

I agree. We can keep on treating women like pieces of meat. Its the 21st for f**ks sake!!

[feral chile]

What I found interesting, in view of earlier comments on how we're programmed to be attracted to bums, is how much that picture of breasts resembled a bum. And the bum-showing is a submissive display. Are full breasts put together a subliminal expression of submission?

mmmmm....that would explain why men can act quite lewdly to big breasted women. It's like they think they've had permission. An unspoken invitation.

We're still dumb animals.

Edited December 3, 2010 by feral chile

[worm]

What I found interesting, in view of earlier comments on how we're programmed to be attracted to bums, is how much that picture of breasts resembled a bum. And the bum-showing is a submissive display. Are full breasts put together a subliminal expression of submission?

Edited December 3, 2010 by worm

[feral chile]

But who's attracted to it Feral?

Is it men or people who want submissive sexual objects?

You're assuming a pre-determined hetrosexual attraction, which is clearly bollocks (no pun intended).

What about women who are attracted to big breasts and men that are attracted to hair style or eye colour? The point being that it isn't about being male at all, but about what you desire.

No 'we' aren't.

Edited December 3, 2010 by feral chile

[worm]

In answer to your question, worm, all you need to do is look into the singles thread to see which sex polices women. It's not men keeping women in their place at all.

Edited December 3, 2010 by worm

[feral chile]

You're confusing masculinity with male and femininity with female. Women who have conformed to an image of femininity are policed by males who have conformed to an image of masculinity. The identity, not the sex, is the determinant factor.

There are studies of this done via chat rooms where the actual sex of the participant is not known and females start policing femininine men.

With that said, the thing with feminine and masculine signifiers is that there are billions of them now, rather than just one archetype of each. For example, I am no less a man if I like smaller breasts, in fact, that's the type of man I am.

And the thing about hormones is that they have to undergo cultural signifiers before we become concsious of our reaction to them.

[irons]

I agree. We can keep on treating women like pieces of meat. Its the 21st for f**ks sake!!

[worm]

Aren't those 2 sentences contradictory?

Edited December 4, 2010 by worm

[worm]

Of course it could be just me, not really knowing what was going on then... or now

Edited December 4, 2010 by worm

[strudders]

No 'we' aren't.

[worm]

Think your find we are pretty much at the top of "dumb" animals...

[strudders]

I deem any animal that can judge itself and adjust itself in light of that insight to be clever.

[strudders]

I'd never heard of this guy until today, but thanks to another thread, I have

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw

[worm]

and I deem one that destroys the environment it lives in extremely dumb and maybe a little ugly on the side.

Edited December 4, 2010 by worm

[worm]

that is (mostly) how I see it... but

"women haven't been allowed to define their own sexuality as it is defined by men"

why should they do anything as defined by anyone else, especially men?