Letters to the Editor
Juliebird
Published Letters: 1769 Editor's Choice: 103
-
my thoughts
[Read the article: Plastic mommies]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]1. The beef the Drs Pollock had with the "mommy package" ofcosmetic surgery is that it is convincing womn to have more surgery than they would typically choose. Their example: I go in for a tummy tuck, but I am convinced to get my breasts "done", even though I thought they were fine before. My decision is based on the packaging of several procedures together and the message that pregnancy has done my body harm and it can only be "restored" by surgery.
2. Pregnancy does change a body. These changes are neither disfiguring scars that need to be corrected before one can again be considered attractive, nor are these romantic badges of honor that are to be worn proudly for the world at large to admire. They are minor changes to a body that happens as life is lived.
3. Most women can restore their bodies back to close to pre-pregnancy shape and size, with some effort. (Ahem. Breast-feeding aids in post-partum weight loss. Extra fluid is flushed out of the body more readily, and the extra calories needed to feed a baby can come from the extr padding the mom acquired during pregnancy. OMG, it's like Mother NAture had a plan!) Most moms who don't largely their pre-pregnancy body don't because they aren't eating or exercizing properly.
That's not a criticism, but it's a truth: what new mom has time or energy to devote to 5 hours a week in the gym, shopping, cooking and eating low-calorie, high-flavor foods? Most new moms are lucky to get out of their pajamas and wolf down a hot dog between feedings and diaper changes! (Celebrities, with their entourages and cadres of personal assistants for mom and baby, seem to manage this better. So, their already ideal body gets an ideal solution that the "regular" moms can't hope to achieve on a "regular" budget and scghedule). By the time mom has time and energy to devot to "restoring" her body (probably when the baby is a kindergartner), that "temporary" extra poundage has been around a few years. Metabolism has changed, so has lifestyle and habits, and the body is a few years older. So it's harder.
I don't have a problem with some women choosing to tuck their tummies. More power to them! I have a big problem with cosmetic surgeons telling women that our body have been "damaged" by pregnancy, childbirth or nursing, and they can magically "cure" us. And while a part of me would *love* to have my "mommy tummy" removed by plastic surgery, I know the better way to get rid of it is to care for myself as much as I care for my babies. If more moms got *that* message, there would be a lot less demand for these mommy packages.
-
so basically your saying that woman are stupid, right?
[Read the article: Plastic mommies]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No. Or, at least no more stupid than men.
Packaging is a consumer marketing gimmick with a long and storied history in this country, and has been applied to both genders of all education levels with ease. (Want that super-sized?)
Combining such a marketing strategy with so-called medical advice is appalling. It is a blurry line between "treat yourself to a boob job too!" and "Your boobs should get done too" or "You would be healthier with boob job" or "I as your doctor recommend you get a boob job."
-
famous does not equal better
[Read the article: My sister is a famous designer -- and I'm not!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Not knowing anything about your sister (or you), I can't begin to commwnt on your work.
But, having a product, or a design, or a piece of art become "popular", or being a "famous" artist does not mean the work or the artist is superior.
In fact, I would think that mass appeal indicates an art work's mediocrity. Something that "everybody" likes is perhaps speaking to far too common a denominator. But art that arouses your passions is the art worth doing. (Always a fine line to walk, since artists need to eat, but still true).
Waiting for the world to commend an artist is often a posthumous event. What's trendy today is quickly forgotten, but what's truly "great" art is sometimes not obvious for decades, even centuries.
So, don't look for fame.
-
tetris
[Read the article: Gaming makes women smarter?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was a tetris (and hextris, and the freaky 3-d tetris that Sega had) in high school and college. I couldn't get ninto all the d&d fantasy games, or the car chase games, or the shoot-em-up games, but Tetris, etc really cleared my head.
And, of course, it's all about manipulating objects into spatial patterns.
-
hmmm
[Read the article: Quote of the Day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]How old is Rubenstein? Old enough to remember RuPaul? Work it girl!
-
@fetboy
[Read the article: The science of strippers' tips]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"but only Dolphins and Humans are able to have sex recreationally."
While I agree with your conclusion (thank you, evolutionary clitoris!), the above statement isn' t entirely accurate:
http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/14721?&print=yes
Humans (and dolphins) don't go into 'heat" but other non-human females do fornicate for non-reproductive reasons.
-
I see no reason to require women to be content with the ravages of childhood on their bodies.
[Read the article: Plastic mommies]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm guessing you meant the ravages of pregnancy and childbirth, not childhood.
But, still. This is the mentality that I find so troubling. Bearing children is not like surviving cancer or stepping on a landmine. "Ravages?" What, slightly more slack belly, perhaps saggier boobs (which, gravity being what it is, happens even to virgin boobs after a time), a spider vein or a skin tag? Oh, please.
This kind of hyperbole is damaging in 2 ways:
1. It tells women that childbearing is a negative act, in terms of what it does to their sexual attractiveness.
2. It casts childbearing as some sort of extreme sport/ultimate sacrifice.
Unless a woman had a complication that required surgery or repair (3rd degree perineal tearing for instance), her body is unravaged by childbearing.
Nobody gets to keep looking 25. Even if they never have babies. Moms and non-moms can and do get corrective surgery if they choose. Hurrah for America!
Suggesting that medically uncomplicated childbearing causes harm to a body that then requires a surgical fix is absurd and rude.