Apple, pear, banana, strawberry.. I'm not naming fruit but types of female body shape. Whilst they are meant to distinguish between different figures, there is a similarity that lies with all three; every descriptor concentrates on how big (or non-existent) the womans boobs and bum are.
I’m not saying that we are under any illusion that this doesn’t happen; any girl on a night out will (well, should) attempt to adhere to the ‘legs or chest’ rule, the slogan ‘my dress is not a yes’ was created by Slutwalk in an attempt to dispel the relationship between clothes and promiscuity and if you open any legitimate men's magazine there will be boobs featured somewhere. It has come to be accepted. Almost.
However, the problem lies when technology comes into play. Whilst the first boob job (believe it or not) was in the late 1800’s, implants did not play a large or important role in society until the second half of the twentieth century. Now, with the right amount of money, you can pretty much guarantee someone will sculpt your ‘perfect’ boobs.
This is all fair enough. If, for any reason, you feel the need to add an extra couple of pounds to your chest, there should be no problem. Whilst some feel that adulterating the body is wrong, if the technology is there to make someone feel more comfortable, in my opinion it should be used.
However, with the bankruptcy of Poly Implant Prothese (PIP), a French company that made implants, a new debate has been aroused. Should the NHS be made to take out dangerous or ruptured implants that were put in by private companies? I don’t think so. If you have a hip replacement done privately then side-effects and complications will be amended by the private provider: at a cost. Furthermore, whilst there is speculation that the rupture rate is alarmingly high - up to 7% in the UK - we must consider that the failure rate for metal joint replacements can be as high as 17%.
Really, we must prioritise. Whilst boob jobs satisfy vanity, other major operations satisfy the ability to carry out daily tasks. If given the choice, I know what I would rather have my money spent on. Give me an A cup anyday.
I’m not saying that we are under any illusion that this doesn’t happen; any girl on a night out will (well, should) attempt to adhere to the ‘legs or chest’ rule, the slogan ‘my dress is not a yes’ was created by Slutwalk in an attempt to dispel the relationship between clothes and promiscuity and if you open any legitimate men's magazine there will be boobs featured somewhere. It has come to be accepted. Almost.
However, the problem lies when technology comes into play. Whilst the first boob job (believe it or not) was in the late 1800’s, implants did not play a large or important role in society until the second half of the twentieth century. Now, with the right amount of money, you can pretty much guarantee someone will sculpt your ‘perfect’ boobs.
This is all fair enough. If, for any reason, you feel the need to add an extra couple of pounds to your chest, there should be no problem. Whilst some feel that adulterating the body is wrong, if the technology is there to make someone feel more comfortable, in my opinion it should be used.
However, with the bankruptcy of Poly Implant Prothese (PIP), a French company that made implants, a new debate has been aroused. Should the NHS be made to take out dangerous or ruptured implants that were put in by private companies? I don’t think so. If you have a hip replacement done privately then side-effects and complications will be amended by the private provider: at a cost. Furthermore, whilst there is speculation that the rupture rate is alarmingly high - up to 7% in the UK - we must consider that the failure rate for metal joint replacements can be as high as 17%.
Really, we must prioritise. Whilst boob jobs satisfy vanity, other major operations satisfy the ability to carry out daily tasks. If given the choice, I know what I would rather have my money spent on. Give me an A cup anyday.
