Breasts Shrink with Economy
A lot of women who invested in big busts are in deflationary mode.
Victoria Beckham, new 'A-List B-Cups' member. Photo courtesy of Daily Beast.
-
Breast Wishes
Who really yearns for 'enhanced' boobs?
-
Young and Breastless
Having survived 'Cancerland', an artist finds wry humour and even a gift in the disease
-
Eek! Nipples!
A few thoughts on Lindsay Lohan's 'threat' to moral decency.
The latest consumer item to be downsized this recession is breasts. It's not just that fewer women are shelling out ten grand for a pair of silicone cups, but that some women are going under the knife to have large implants turned into smaller ones.
The Daily Beast has a gallery of celebs who've remodeled their busts, called "A-List B-Cups," with the most high profile case being that of Victoria Beckham. Most people agree she has had three surgeries (though she denies it), and her most recent change was from a 34DD to a 'more manageable' 34B. Tabloids report that everyone from Lindsay Lohan to Drew Barrymore to Jennifer Connelly is diminishing her dimensions.
There are a few theories as to why women are going down to get a leg up. The first is specific to A-list circles -- many celebs are migrating to the fashion industry and appeasing the 'size zero demands' of its fickle and demanding god. As the UK-based Sun wrote, when Beckham first appeared with her new, smaller orbs, "Posh, 35, felt her mega chest didn't fit in with her new role as an upmarket fashion designer. A source said, "Victoria has wanted her implants taken out for a while. She felt that was part of her old 'WAG' image -- the big hair, big boobs, fake tan -- and that she has moved on since those days."
In the article 'Is downsizing one’s boobs the new Hollywood upgrade?' the Frisky blog says, "We're not sure which is worse -- women feeling the pressure to get implants, or feeling like weirdos if they're not an A- or B-cup? Could this have anything to do with all the celebs that are moonlighting in the stick-figure-dominated fashion biz?"
But I know several non-celeb women who're also contemplating getting reductions, and have heard even more people, of late, discussing how ridiculous oversized implants are. So this isn't just about a few irrelevant Hollywood starlets flirting with fashion.
Theory one
A friend of mine has a theory. Her three friends with implants are all miserable, because each ended up with bigger implants than they wanted. All asked for B- or C-cups, but the surgeons, supposedly wanting them to feel sufficiently transformed, (and feel like they got their money's worth) pushed them into getting D-cups. Now all three feel like they have porn boobs, are self-conscious, and want reductions. My friend suggested implants have been around long enough that the initial thrill of them is over. And that because enough women have complained to their friends about being pressured into a 'one (oversized) size fits all' approach, women are now starting to demand what they actually want, or are getting them changed into what they wanted in the first place.
Theory two
A male friend had another theory. He suggested that people are finally catching on to the fact that the implant craze was entirely manufactured. That most men like natural boobs, regardless of size. And that the silicone is leaking out of cosmetic surgery's once successful advertising campaign promoting 'bigger and better'. Like most men I know (is this abnormal?) he says he prefers small, uneven, or even slightly saggy natural ones to perfect fake ones. And let's just say the long description he gave me of his wife's small, imperfect, post-breastfeeding breasts, was convincing.
A third theory
All of that makes sense, but perhaps another deflationary pressure is the fact that conspicuous consumption of all kinds is getting the cut, be it DD boobs or brand-name outfits. Large implants have always looked like, well, implants, and that kind of 'bling' is as outdated as the word itself. For the moment, modesty, not excess, is in vogue, and some women are changing their bodies to suit.
Women have always starved and fed and exercised their bodies into different forms, according to the demands of culture. From making ourselves Rubenesque several centuries ago, to pear-shaped in the flapper days, to voluptuous like Marilyn Monroe and the fictional Joan Holloway of Mad Men, to rail thin in the heroin-chic model heyday, our bodies have been seen as clay, and many of us have agreed to sculpt ourselves.
Anyone who criticizes women for it -- even for getting implants -- doesn't understand how powerful culture is.
But if the ideal is now for women to surgically change their bodies every few years to conform to the whims of fashion, I'm pretty sure that's part of the dictionary definition of escalation. I heard someone the other day talking about how disgusting he found the disfiguring and painful trend of Chinese foot binding. Um, how is this different?
Feeling sexy is fun; feeling beautiful and attractive is pretty awesome. But knowing that women feel the pressure of going under the knife, at great pain and expense, on a regular basis to experience those things? That's a joy killer.
Where have we landed here? Economists used to muse that the confident mood of the nation's consumers rose and fell with hem lines. Are we in an age of such artificial adjustments to the body that one can gauge where society is headed by the breast sizes most commonly pushed by plastic surgeons? ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
btrain
19-08-2009
I'll be the first of
I'll be the first of probably several to tell you that footbinding was a Chinese practice, never Japanese. It was partly for the (in our view somewhat perverted) aesthetic quality of the tiny foot, but also to underline that the possessor of said tiny feet was too noble to do any useful work (ditto for the extremely long fingernails the upper classes of both sexes cultivated). Also, a wife or concubine with bound feet couldn't escape unassisted!
Though classical Japanese notions of female beauty included completely shaven eyebrows (that were then painted in unlikely places) and blackened teeth....
dave49
19-08-2009
Small breasts a "treatable" condition
Small breasts became a "treatable" condition in the mid-1980s according to the USA's professional association for plastic surgeons. That concern over "feeling good about yourself" and having the surgery for self-esteem purpose, continues to this day. Look at http://thetyee.ca/Views/2009/05/13/MissCalifornia/ and specifically, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/01/miss-californias-breast-i_n_194385.html
However, the idea of reshaping your body every few years to fit the latest fashion and cultural trends is disturbing. That said, in the case of implants, even the newer silicone rubber-saline filled implants apparently have a removal rate of about 50% over three years and a typically last 6 to 7 years before they fail.
This is not child's play, but surgery with general anesthetic and the usual risk of infection and complications. So , the cost is more than just dollars.
mijnheer
19-08-2009
Splendor Sine Occasu
Who exactly has been putting pressure on women to get implants? It's not men. Your male friend is right: men overwhelmingly prefer the real thing, and in any case many men do not find large breasts attractive. This raises the larger question: Why are women so concerned with their own appearance? It's not good enough to blame it on advertising, since advertising would not work so well unless women were already disposed to be influenced by it. Here's a hypothesis: what began long ago as women trying to make themselves attractive to potential mates has, through natural selection, become a genetic imperative divorced from its original purpose. Women have become programmed to decorate and display themselves, and even if every man disappeared from the face of the earth, through a plague or genetic engineering, the impulse of women to dress up and worry about their appearance would continue unabated. Splendor Sine Occasu -- or Augmentation, for that matter.
Katatak
19-08-2009
Oh, mijnheer, your argument
Oh, mijnheer, your argument has some nice shape to it but you seem to be missing some key points in your determination to absolve males of blame for encouraging women to augment their breasts. You have forgotten "how powerful culture is" (Richmond) and that males make up approximately half our culture. Futhermore, the industries that pump out culture, be it low or high, are still largely dominated by male execs. Advertising, movies, TV and other visual media all play a role in women's self-esteems, whether they undermine natural physical appearances or capitalize on already low self-esteems.
Your hypothesis about natural selection and genetic imperative is also flawed. In our evolutionary history, males selected mates based on beauty while females selected mates that would best provide for their offspring. Little has changed, except that now women have options to fool genetics by altering their appearance with cosmetics and cosmetic surgery.
You are probably right that "even if every man disappeared from the face of the earth, through a plague or genetic engineering, the impulse of women to dress up and worry about their appearance would continue unabated," because women are as concerned about their appearance in front of other women as they are in front of men. However, this has more to do with competition and heirarchy (nobody wants to be ostracized for their appearance) than anything else and is a very primitive behavior, as we can see with the way Chimpanzees interact with one another.
All that being said, I hope this trend of breasts going up and down with the economy is short-lived; shoe heels and skirt lenghts are probably more practical and healthy fashion trends to follow the economy's ups and downs.
freebear
19-08-2009
What about penis enlargement pumps?
Its the 21st Century with a host of problems and here is a story on fake boobs!
What about penis pump sales? :Let us not discriminate, now!
Bob Watts
19-08-2009
Bob on Boobs
Smaller thank you! When I talk with a woman I look her in the eyes. Want to melt a man? Just a big smile does it for me...
Rufus
19-08-2009
Guys don't get it.
another excellent article from Vanessa. Why DO women do this to themselves? Do women know that we men are but mere spectators to this? Most men live their entire lives in t-shirts and jeans. Sure, professionals wear suits, but how hard is it to buy a suit? Simple. Go to the store and buy a suit. End of story. Women linger for hours in clothing stores, boutiques, etc. I don't mean to be offensive, but it's like observing a crazy person, with all that make-up, high heels, hairspray, etc etc. It can't be healthy.
But I bet they will do this to themselves until the end of time.
dorothy
19-08-2009
And it's completely in reverse
"Women have become programmed to decorate and display themselves"
It used to be that the men did the strutting and the wimmen did the selecting. This worked better, developmentally speaking, due to their respective procreative capacity. SO, we are truly perverse, one way or another. Ask any Amazon native. Or get the Time-Life coffee table tome out and see for yourself, how the men wear the beads, the feathers, and the joystick embellishments, while the women look so down-to-earth colorless and business-like they could be escaped CEO's. I don't know, where we went astray, but we sure did, with a vengeance.
ME2
19-08-2009
Fashions
Oh, I dunno 'bout that, Dorothy. How about Tattoos, Labrets, labia enlargement, foot-binding, ritual scarring, nose piercings, and so on? And then we can run the gamut of bare breasts to burkas.
As you note, we could probably do a similar number on men.
RickW
19-08-2009
Previously......
....in recessionary times, it was the hemlines that grew longer as times got tougher........
North of Hope
19-08-2009
carbon sequestering
Maybe this would work if we could combine breast enlargement with carbon sequestering. Just think one could have larger breasts (or other organs) and save the environment. It's a win-win all around.
dave49
20-08-2009
Rufus
The other thing is that shopping (consuming) has become a integral part of young women's lifestyles. A few months back, my wife walked to a work lunch function with a group of young women employees. All they talked about was shopping, buying this item of clothing or that. It seemed to her that these young women could not go a week without buying some article of clothing without suffering withdrawl.
Some stats came out a few years back that found for both Canada and the USA, real income for the middle class has been stagnant for 20 to 25 years. So the only way young workers could afford to consume so much is the plethora of cheap imported goods. Our buying power has improved, but not our actual income. I have this pet theory that successive governments, both here and stateside, have encouraged the off-shoring of goods production to maintain the facade of economic progress. Otherwise, as history has shown, when policies and especially taxation favour the rich and powerful to the detriment of the little people, there is the risk of revolution.
Recently, a book appeared about the real cost of cheap goods. I'm surprised it took so long.
The steep price of discount goods
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/07/30/f-cheap-ruppel-shell.html
redriverboy
20-08-2009
Haha
This is what passes for journalisn these days. Hi-larious.
Yammer
20-08-2009
Theory Four
The practicality argument.
Today, thin is in. We want to lower our bodyfat so that we do not look unattractive, like poor people, comedians, or football coaches. Therefore we eat much lean protein, reduce simple carbs, and exercise vigorously and often.
I do not personally have breasts but I can imagine that jogging with big ones is going to result in taking a constant rain of blows to the face. So they must go!
North of Hope
20-08-2009
@ dave49
Don't forget the movie about Walmart, "The High Cost of Low Prices." Very similar theme as the book.
Rufus
20-08-2009
Dorothy
are girls becoming boys?
http://martlet.ca/article/19550-girls-will-be-boys
KWD
21-08-2009
Theory four
Theory four: Leisure time (a product of technology and a measure of affluence) manufactures consent.
Barring surgical intervention for health reasons, altering breast size is simply an example corporate money mongers turning judgment into reality, and capitalizing on society’s abundance of well-heeled distortional thinkers.
Although the article claims a lot of women are reducing breast size, the actual number, as a proportion of the total population, is probably quite small and limited to those that have money. If we rule out money as a factor, it's likely the numbers of women increasing and/or decreasing breast size would sky rocket. It’s doubtful that size reduction is a response to economic trends.
The fact that fashion trends and body image are constantly changing … in this case reducing breast size … tells us that the power elite … usually men … see a need to keep men and women under control.
There’s money to be made in a society where men and women are convinced they’re making the decisions.