I can't really argue with the widely-accepted assumption that good-looking people do better in life; ultimate tragedies such as Marilyn Monroe aside, this is probably true.

Of course, Monroe was extremely beautiful, and the extremely beautiful might have different problems and challenges to contend with than the merely quite pretty.

Monroe lived in an easier time period, too:

Women are now not just expected to disrobe for the doctor; they must also show it all to the waxer. They are expected to habitually wear shoes that end up crippling them (and/or causing unsightly bunions and hammertoes), they need to diet and exercise rigorously to be and stay thin, they are required o do something with their hair that involves scads of hair-products, and expensive appointments at the hair-salons, they must tweeze, and remove (and have waxed away) Any hair that is Not on their heads, or fringing their eyes, they must buy and wear tons of makeup, all artfully applied to look as "natural" as possible, (but better_, they must groom their nails and feet religiously, they must tend to their skin constantly, they must spend a great deal of money, time and effort on their wardrobes...and then, they are expected to go out and conquer the world.

Oh, but even all this is Not enough. Women must also, with increasing frequency, submit to the time, considerable expense and real risk of going under the knife to change her looks even more drastically than the afore-mentioned techniques and practices can do.

She must risk the fact that she might not even like how she looks afterwards, or that she might even become addicted to plastic surgery.

As she ages, it only gets worse (read Nora Ephron's "I Hate My Neck" for all the gory details).

A truly scant few seem to question any of this at all, or, even if they do, there is the view that one should be realistic and just accept it as the way it is.

More and more, the regular, every day woman with her non-celebrity life is expected to look like a celebrity. To look as much like a Lindsey Lohan or Katherine Heigl, or somone young, hot and famous, as possible.

Beauty is a lovely commodity, but I think everyone is getting more and more shallow about it.

Given this sort of environment, how can I argue that cosmetic surgery is Not an investment? I really cannot.

God forbide William Saletan advise people to think twice before they Invest in cosmetic surgery (oh, but then, he's a guy and probably likes and expects women to look great, too, but doesn't want to know about all the messy, bloody ways they took, to get there, maybe).

Apparently, true beauty, these days, is tall, thin, has large breasts and the backside of a little boy - and never ages.

At least Marilyn Monroe was allowed to be "fat" (yes, and it's only in This day and age that she is considered to be so).

I'm not against cosmetic surgery at all; rather, I'm against the Need and Expectation to look like absolutely perfect until one is a corpse.

Even then, appearances must be kept up, via the mortician's tender ministrations. It doesn't end until the worms or the fire does its work.

Cold comfort, indeed.

I read this excellent book a few back called The Body Project (I unfortunately forget the name of the author). The general idea is that women spend excessive amounts of resources-time, money, emotional energy- on trying to look perfect, and these resources are thus diverted away from more important activities. I think any woman can attest to this. The money alone is ridiculous- women go into a drugstore and come out with at least shampoo, conditioner, body wash, acne rinse, moisturizers (2 bottles, because the face and body require different ones), razors, wax, shave cream, whitening toothpaste, make up, toe nail polish, tampons...the list just grows from there. What do men buy? a bottle of pert plus (that lasts them a year), a bar of soap, and the cheapest can of shaving cream?

And I can't tell you how many times I've been running late to work and noticed that my legs haven't been shaved in 2 days and therefore I have to change out of a skirt, or I'm heading off somewhere in sandals and realize my toenails aren't painted or my toe hair is growing. there's always something. And I'm pretty low-maintenance.

And don't forget, we not only have to disrobe for our doctors and waxists, but now we are practically expected to visit the waxist before we can visit the doctor!

"And don't forget, we not only have to disrobe for our doctors and waxists, but now we are practically expected to visit the waxist before we can visit the doctor!"

God, that's a very troubling direction this waxing business is going in - now, even the doctor has to be impressed by the fact that grown women make their nether regions look like those of a child's?

Something is wrong, when this stuff becomes as good as required. Remember: this really Is a choice. Women do Not have to court nasty, red rashes on the most sensitive regions of their body. I mean: Ouch!!!

Of course, if you mean simply shaving one's legs, then yes: I agree. A doctor's visit seems to require this, sad to say. Cleanliness, I can understand, but skin as smooth as satin, too? Still, leg shaving - or waxing - is not as bad as getting rid of ALL hair. What a ghastly invention, this waxing of certain areas.

If women justify the existance of such bias by following them, they deserve each and every damn thing they get as a result. So wait, I am fat and ugly, balding and getting old. Frankly, I dont give a shit, I wear the same clothes I did 10 years ago, dont dye my hair, can think of better things to do with 5 or 10k than getting (fill in the blank here) and date women that dont wear make-up. Then again, I am a member of a minority group that already gets remunerated at a far lower rate than white females, so my other failings as a human being may be a moot point. Maybe if they ever come up with a 'hispanectomy' and I can get all my brown skin removed, then maybe I will have a chance in life.

Normally, the thoughtfulness with which women's issues are discussed here is both moving and thought provoking. But to hear someone justifying plastic surgery as a reasonable, income related expense for non-pornstars is about the dumbest thing I have ever read on this site.

Keep up the dumb work! Maybe we can enslave a few more generations of helpless females before the women of the world finally get around to demanding what should be their birthright as a human. To be judged by the content of their character, rather than the color, or tone, of their skin.

Diaz, I'm not for appearance-obsesion, I'm against it - or against it when carried out to extremes, as seems to be happening more and more.

You have the "well, I suffer, Too, and my suffering matters so much More than what the Dumb Bimbos go through" argument going. Charming.

"At least Marilyn Monroe was allowed to be "fat" (yes, and it's only in This day and age that she is considered to be so)."

That's an urban legend. Monroe was much smaller than a size 16.

you dumb bimbos do it to yourself...you are your own worst enemy..

Weyhey, my point is that Monroe was considerably fleshier than most popular, mainstream actresses are today. (Do you truly know what a size 16 looks like? It is not obese, or even fat. It's curvaceous).

"you dumb bimbos do it to yourself...you are your own worst enemy.. " Women who express such a sentiment are usually quite jealous not to Look like the "dumb bimbo" in question. For men, it's usually a seething resentment that they cannot get the "dumb bimbo" interested in them at All. Anger - the greatest compensating factor of all.:)

and your excuse? either ugly, or dumb?

Mara5525:

Weyhey, my point is that Monroe was considerably fleshier than most popular, mainstream actresses are today. (Do you truly know what a size 16 looks like? It is not obese, or even fat. It's curvaceous).

Yes, I do know what size 16 looks like, and it isn't 5'6", 36D-22-36. Monroe was curvy where it counts, but she was also quite slim. In today's dress sizes, I'd guess her to be about a 4, depending on the cut.

Back in Marilyn's day, she WAS a size 16. But dress sizes were cut smaller.

At her largest, she wore size 16 dresses, which today, would be around size 10, not 4.

Just look at pictures of her in a swimsuit. Not fat but not Hollywood toned either. A little flab here and there, but nothing egregious. Kate Winslet has a similar waist size to Marilyn Monroe.

Mara--

Dumb-bimbo hater here. Can't say I'd want the look even if it did come naturally. Frail bodies with awkward curves and generic faces just don't project an image I'd be proud to have. No, I resent these women because their brittle, mindless, soulless version of femininity fuels nasty stereotypes that make it harder for those of us with boobs AND brains to prove that we deserve an equal place in society. (It doesn't help that bimbos are the main vector by which a certain type of prick reproduces, but I suppose I should be grateful they've taken that bullet for the rest of us.)

The claim that cosmetic surgery is an "investment" that increases a person's worth in a society that values beauty labors under a false assumption: that cosmetic surgery actually makes people look better. I have rarely if ever seen a case where cosmetic surgery made someone look more attractive; in virtually all cases, face lifts, eyebrow adjustments, breast augmentation, etc. ar far more likely to make a person look freakish than look better. Plastic surgery for reconstructive purposes is a different matter, but surgical attempts to make a person look younger or to conform to some standard of beauty simply don't work (and it seems odd to me that hardly anyone points that out in the "debate" about whether people should get plastic surgery). I can think of far more Hollywood stars who looked worse after plastic surgery than looked better.

Mara,

Normally I dont like to engage in the juvenile behavior that is 'flaming', but in my estimation, you shouldnt be permitted an opinion. My point was, since you seem to be irony challenged, is that I DONT suffer, I dont allow myself to suffer, because I refuse to have other people's expectations for my appearance. You are NOT required to shave anything you dont want to, you dont need to use wax for anything other than candles and antique cars and I have never seen anyone forced to wear high heels at gunpoint. All the stupidity you mention is voluntary and self inflicted. And as such, it warrants no sympathy whatsoever.

Women get what they have coming to them, I am sorry to say. If your self value is tied up in your make-up, hair or clothing, you are a shallow waste of a social security number. Perhaps for teen girls, some of that behavior might be excused, but where are their mothers and role models to steer them away from this sort of stupid frivolity? If you wax yourself, wear stupid painful shoes, spend more than 5% of your income on clothing or decide that the road to happiness passes through DD valley, who in the hell are you to complain? Just say 'No', not only no, but HELL NO and dont put up with that crap. If youre a topless dancer or porn star, then maybe your looks matter on some level connected to your career. If not, youre a bimbo, a tired, stale joke that doesnt bear repeating.

Know what I find sexy? Ready in 5 minutes to go out. Able to hold a conversation. Understanding of geography, history and politics. An opinion that differs from my own, that gets defended vigorously. Goals independant of marriage. Absence of high maintainance, anxiety, self-image bullshit. Because I dont allow myself to be molded or guided by what I believe to be unrealistic expectations or models of behavior, I dont have to suffer when I dont measure up to them.

Fortunately, I work in a field that is chock full of women that have their heads straight and their priorities in order. Noone on my floor cares about the presence of a 'Y' chromosome when they judge the merit of someones work, or of the label on their purse, pants, shoes or any other piece of clothing. When the bimbos of this world stop their complicity in their own enslavement, then it will come to a screeching halt. Until then, I will hold you and your ilk with contempt.