Fake Boobs: Victim of bad PR?

[Realitycrash]

Here's an ample comparison: Tattoos

Nope. Tattoos don't replace parts of your body. Not a valid comparison.

Implants doesn't replace a part of your body either (unless you have had to remove your breast due to cancer), but enhances, so the comparison stands.
And even IF they completely replaced, why would it matter? What matters is that you do things to make yourself more beautiful, not how you do it. Show me why it would be ethically relevant if it in fact replaced parts of your body, compared to anything else that enhances.

Yes they do, they replace natural breasts. Don't be obtuse.

You used an incorrect comparison to support your argument.

And tattoo-ink replace part of my pigment, thus replacing natural skin-color.

..Sorry, what was your point again?

 

[Realitycrash]

It doesn't take much effort in asking around the general populace to find out that silicone breasts, and those that have them, are viewed with skepticism and derision.
Women with them are instantly portrayed as vain/insecure/stupid/Alpha-bitches/Sluts/Etc.

Still, when one stops to think about it, several inconsistencies come to light. If we ignore the (hopefully) small portion of people that get fake breasts due to breast-cancer, or having suffered so much bullying/derision for their small breasts in life that the only fixing the "problem" will finally be able to calm their psyche, breast-implants are done solely to be aesthetically pleasing.
But, I ask, isn't that an arbitrary factor, one among many equal factors one can put blame on, but in reality never catch as much flack?
Here's an ample comparison: Tattoos cost a lot of money, and are (usually) done solely to be aesthetically pleasing. Up until recently, these were too object of derision and prejudice, only worn by "thugs and prisoners". Yet recent trends clearly show that society have gradually shifted its views concerning them.
Both tattoos and implants are a form of body-altering surgery. Both cost a lot of money (granted, it takes awhile to build up enough tattoos for it to rival the cost of an average boob-job, but once you do, you still don't get the same bad PR), and both are done pretty much for the sake of vanity. If body-alteration is the main issue here, then why aren't we scorning bleaching of the hair (which is bad for the scalp), or hair-removal (can be very painful)?
If it is vanity and costs that is the main motivation for why implants are seen as bad, why don't we derive those with expensive clothing? A few fancy suits equal the price of implants. Shoes and clothing (and Sex and the City hilariously proved) can cost enormous sums, but is also equally seen as "silly and quirky", yet socially acceptable to most.
And hell, don't even get me started on sports-cars..
If we are going to make snide remarks concerning implants, why not these factors?

If we are going to assume that a person with implants are of bad character, because of her vanity and or what she spends her money on, then there's a whole throng of people that should also be deserving of your scorn.
I'm guessing there's a double standard at work here, somewhere in the background.

Now, have I rattled your intuitions? Have you any comments or other insights?

I just find it idiotic. Breasts don't make you attractive.

I know many, many people of both genders that would disagree.

 

[Charli]

I guess I see more people who really DON'T need them (vain twats with more hair products leaked into their skull than should be safely allowed) having this surgery done.

Than people who really DO need it (Breast cancer survivors, etc) And I have never disdained the surgery for that. You can tell quite often who's had it done out of necessity and out of vanity.


I think people need to take some time to accept their flaws whatever they are sometimes. Having larger breasts doesn't benefit you much in any way, but I'd much rather someone who had their whole body image changed due to a terrible illness, restored to them, than a idiot who just feels a little down that they don't have D cups, perfect nose, perfect teeth, hair, etc. Flaws on humans make them...well... more pleasing to look at in my opinion.

You shouldn't be made to feel like you need breast implants, and I know me being a slightly larger endowed lady don't have much room for talking but I will say it now, having larger breasts has done me no life favours. Sleeping can get uncomfortably horrible, wearing certain kinds of clothing is impossible, when I go swimming I feel so uncomfortable because every swimsuit I find is designed to show off 'everything'. I might just get a scuba suit one day.

All I mean to say is you can still have all the 'fixes' to being what the media tells you is perfection and still feel insecure in yourself. Breast implants are not necessary. It's a frivolity I would rather have wasted on people who really have need of it.



The surgery itself is not an evil thing, I never thought that, though some jobs are terribly done and look obviously fake. But that's on the surgeons who perform these things and the people who choose to have it done.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I don't really care. What a woman wants to do with her body is her own business. If she wants to become the next BeShine. Go nuts! I prefer natural breasts myself.

 

[major_chaos]

I dislike them because I find it repulsive that people are making money on the insecurity of victims of modern media's unrealistic body image expectations. In other words it annoys me that people feel the need to get boob jobs because it means some women have been led to feel that they wont be considered attractive if they don't have giant tits.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

Apples and Oranges. Sure, tattoos and implants are similar in the abstract but they're still pretty damn different. Implants are (the vast majority of the time) purely there to make whichever person has them look more overtly sexualised.
Tattoos, on the other hand, generally make a statement about the personality of whoever has them or denote belonging to a particular subculture.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Perhaps boob jobs have a problem with a lack of positive exposure

...


[small]I'll see myself out[/small]

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

To me it's a level of sexual mutilation next to foot binding and I think people shouldn't do it and society certainly shouldn't encourage it. That said I would never look down a women (or man) that had them done, that's very judgemental and I have no right to call someone out that I don't even know.

I think changing our bodies to fit some societal norm is rather damaging to our species both physically and mentally at the end of the day. People should be accepted for who they are not encouraged to aim towards some homogenised, aesthetic event horizon.

In the case of the young girl who had plastic surgery to discourage bullying it's the bullies that should have been firmly shown their behaviour isn't acceptable not the girl who is encouraged to conform.

 

[Flames66]

Breast implants spoil the fun. I like to fondle them. I prefer big boobs. But I'll also fondle small boobs. But fake boobs are not boobs. They do not arouse me when I fondle them. They turn me off.

An example of how they can look well shaped and tastefully proportioned is Bianca Beauchamp:

Spoiler

You mean there's a girl behind those things? Seriously, they are far too big for a skinny girl like her and they only look vaguely plausible because they are in a corset. Find a pic of her in a bikini and they look ridiculous. Boobs the size of watermelons should respect the law of gravitation.

Spoiler

There you go. They still look good to me.

 

[Scars Unseen]

I don't care either way. When I'm out and about, I want a woman for what she's doing with me, not what she looks like. And if we should end up alone with the lights and clothes off... well, same thing really. Function over form for me, I guess.