A
ateclc
Guest
It’s the discerning of the little voice in my head that I am having trouble with. Which one is my voice and which is God’s?
- Status
P
Ponyguy
Guest
ATECLC, if your scoliosis and differential breast size are related, and your spinal offset continues to worsen because of it, then that malformation is potentially hazardous to your health. If you think that a “mismatch” of your breast sizes is contributing to additional spinal curvature, then there is probably nothing to discern. Get the job done!
FWIW: Our daughter had scoliosis, and the curvature was so pronounced, and advancing so rapidly that it began affecting her lung function; many people criticized me for pushing the surgery issue with my wife who was undecided on whether to proceed with the surgical issue. Our daughter’s lung capacity was rapidly dwindling, but several self-proclaimed “experts” urged us to take our time, and try getting a physician to prescribe a Milwaukee Brace, or a Boston TLSO, anything instead of surgery. I could only feel helpless as I watched our daughter withering away in a matter of just a couple of weeks. An opportunity arose to have the corrective surgery on a couple days’ notice and I grabbed my wife and said “We’re jumping at this. The Good Lord wants us to care for our daughter, and He has just handed us the opportunity.” Happily for her, our daughter regained her diminished lung capacity, thanks to our exploitation of an opportunity. She also gained 3½" in height when the scoliosis surgery was finished.
I apologize for my rambling personal story, but scoliosis scares the dickens out of me; I watched our daughter gasping for breath as she struggled with it, and I felt helpless in the face of it. If your “mis-matched mammaries” (a bit of alliteration there
) are contributing to your spinal curvature, I urge and pray for you to please take whatever measures you consider necessary to help correct the problem.
A
ateclc
Guest
Our daughter’s lung capacity was rapidly dwindling, but several self-proclaimed “experts” urged us to take our time, and try getting a physician to prescribe a Milwaukee Brace,
I had the Milwaukee or about 3 years. I stopped wearing it and by my junior year in h.s. the curve was progressing rapidly. I was at 63 on my major curve, ( I have 3). I finally had the Harrington’s put in. We do what we have to do I guess.
I had the Milwaukee or about 3 years. I stopped wearing it and by my junior year in h.s. the curve was progressing rapidly. I was at 63 on my major curve, ( I have 3). I finally had the Harrington’s put in. We do what we have to do I guess.
O
OrangeOwl
Guest
What about something like jaw asymmetry (condylar hyperplasia)? It’s somewhat rare, but some people have one side of their jaw longer than the other. Sometimes it deviates only 5 mm (still pretty noticeable); sometimes it’s 40 mm longer on one side. In some people, the longer side stops growing after puberty; in others, it never stops growing.
Obviously, this is something that everyone agrees should be fixed – if it interferes with eating, or causes pain.
But what if it’s purely cosmetic? Is it “vanity” to fix something like that?
Obviously, this is something that everyone agrees should be fixed – if it interferes with eating, or causes pain.
But what if it’s purely cosmetic? Is it “vanity” to fix something like that?
B
Bobby_Jim
Guest
let’s not forget that having breast augmentation (or any other elective cosmetic surgery) is major surgery, often (I believe) involves general anesthesia, and has a few weeks of recovery time. There are major risks that are not generally associated with other cosmetic (or therapeutic) things people have mentioned, like ear piercing, tatoos, braces, etc. Everything of course has some risk (you can get an infection from piercing, etc). But it seems to me that major surgery is not something to be undertaken lightly.
It also occurs to me that if you are not happy with yourself, or your marriage, or your social status, or whatever… if you get breast implants to fix that, you will still not be happy with yourself, your marriage, or your social status, just with larger breasts. Kind of like the notion that no matter where you go to escape your problems, the problem is that you bring yourself along with you.
It also occurs to me that if you are not happy with yourself, or your marriage, or your social status, or whatever… if you get breast implants to fix that, you will still not be happy with yourself, your marriage, or your social status, just with larger breasts. Kind of like the notion that no matter where you go to escape your problems, the problem is that you bring yourself along with you.
2
2angels
Guest
From a purely theoretical standpoint, is it really any different than bleaching hair to be blonde or highlighted, or putting mascara on to make eyelashes thicker and longer?
R
Ravemacneil
Guest
I personally believe these issues exist in a dialectic between two poles, not as actually being either pole in a binary black or white sense.
Thus I think many things are fine - symbols of self-respect, small fixes or alignments with current societal expectations - and others are quite negative as they can reinforce secular ideas of self-worship or that it is the opinion of others that counts instead of the opinion of God.
God made me rather thin, so I’m not going to go get muscle implants to pretend I have muscular DNA, for example. Yet I made my teeth look ugly due to poor habits of my own doing, so by my own doing, I improved that through cosmetic dentistry.
My big worry regarding breast implants is that real self-esteem can only come from real and actual self-improvement - is this not true?
Taking up exercise and running a marathon, learning to play an instrument, mastering a new language - from these real improvments comes self-esteem boosts.
Fake breasts are fake. You do not have bigger breasts. You have the appearance of having bigger breasts, and you will always know that it isn’t real.
I would urge people to think about this issue as identical to fake muscle implants in men: they are not muscles. You are not stronger. They do not represent an actual improvement or achievement and thus cannot improve your actual self-esteem without an unhealthy dose of denial.
Repairing damage due to cancer or fixing back problems due to very large breasts clearly are issues that do not arise from mere vanity.
yours in Christ,
RMN
Thus I think many things are fine - symbols of self-respect, small fixes or alignments with current societal expectations - and others are quite negative as they can reinforce secular ideas of self-worship or that it is the opinion of others that counts instead of the opinion of God.
God made me rather thin, so I’m not going to go get muscle implants to pretend I have muscular DNA, for example. Yet I made my teeth look ugly due to poor habits of my own doing, so by my own doing, I improved that through cosmetic dentistry.
My big worry regarding breast implants is that real self-esteem can only come from real and actual self-improvement - is this not true?
Taking up exercise and running a marathon, learning to play an instrument, mastering a new language - from these real improvments comes self-esteem boosts.
Fake breasts are fake. You do not have bigger breasts. You have the appearance of having bigger breasts, and you will always know that it isn’t real.
I would urge people to think about this issue as identical to fake muscle implants in men: they are not muscles. You are not stronger. They do not represent an actual improvement or achievement and thus cannot improve your actual self-esteem without an unhealthy dose of denial.
Repairing damage due to cancer or fixing back problems due to very large breasts clearly are issues that do not arise from mere vanity.
yours in Christ,
RMN
2
2angels
Guest
You are just justifying what society today has said is ok but it is still really the same. Certain other religions would argue that it is all wrong and it is not shades of grey but black and white.
There really is no difference…You can replace your words to fit bleaching hair as well…
“Fake breasts are fake. You do not have bigger breasts. You have the appearance of having bigger breasts, and you will always know that it isn’t real.
…They do not represent an actual improvement or achievement and thus cannot improve your actual self-esteem without an unhealthy dose of denial.”
Bleached blonde hair “is fake. You do not have” blonde hair. " You have the appearance of having blonde hair, and you will always know that it isn’t real." It does not represent an actual improvement or achievement and thus cannot improve your actual self-esteem without an unhealthy dose of denial.
In addition, it is unhealthy for your hair. It causes breakage.
People may be wanting breast implants after breast feeding or a masectomy to give them what they once were given by God. People never had blonde hair.
There really is no difference…You can replace your words to fit bleaching hair as well…
“Fake breasts are fake. You do not have bigger breasts. You have the appearance of having bigger breasts, and you will always know that it isn’t real.
…They do not represent an actual improvement or achievement and thus cannot improve your actual self-esteem without an unhealthy dose of denial.”
Bleached blonde hair “is fake. You do not have” blonde hair. " You have the appearance of having blonde hair, and you will always know that it isn’t real." It does not represent an actual improvement or achievement and thus cannot improve your actual self-esteem without an unhealthy dose of denial.
In addition, it is unhealthy for your hair. It causes breakage.
People may be wanting breast implants after breast feeding or a masectomy to give them what they once were given by God. People never had blonde hair.
C
constantseeker
Guest
Many people are born with very light blonde hair that gradually darkens as they age, kind of like how life can cause breasts to sag… Dying their hair would just take them back to what God gave then at birth.
2
2angels
Guest
Agree. Some never had blonde hair though. Which is evident that they are similar in that sense as well…sometimes both change someone to what one was born with, sometimes both can be purely for vanity.
R
Ravemacneil
Guest
It is not the same merely because they are similar. It is not “no different.”
Simply replacing words in a sentence with other words that still leave that sentence grammatically sound does not somehow vanquish the original logic. If you follow your thinking here, clothes and hair cuts become a problem.
Do you really think hair dye is as invasive and permanent - “no different” - as surgery?
The reason I am arguing that from a “theologically standpoint” it is different is because the essence is completely different. This is also why there are degrees of sin.
You’re thinking substance and essence are equatable, one and the same, but they are not.
There is a categorical difference between a minor flirtation with the pull of vanity and jumping into bed with it head first. That category is essence.
Thus I don’t worry about the self-esteem of a woman who has highlights. I do worry about the self-esteem of a woman with ridiculously giant fake breasts. According to you, this is wrong.
Why?
Many, many things share substance but they are positive or negative morally according to essence. Like sexual function. Would you say that since fornication involves engaging in the exact same physical act that such a fact somehow degrades marital relations? Of course you wouldn’t. Because they are essentially different.
Ice and steam share identical substance, but their essence is completely different, in fact opposite. One heats, one cools; they aren’t equal merely because they are substantially the same, right?
In the same way, the essence of make-up or a hairstyle to mark group identity is completely different from the essential effects of surgical permanent altering motivated by the sign-value attached to secondary sexual characteristics.
I would completely support any good moral person engaging in non-permanent improvements to their self-image, even though my wife and I choose not to dye our own hair (IOW I’m not arguing something from which I have to gain.)
I would cautiously councel any person wishing to gain self-esteem through the surgical implantation of man-made objects.
Breast lifts aren’t what I’m speaking of. Merely that there is a theological difference between combing one’s hair (though God made it rather frizzy) and implanting silicone, and our fear of relativism should not make us so quick to box things together that we allow others, by their understanding that one thing doesn’t belong in that box, to rationalize that neither does the other.
Peace,
RMN
Simply replacing words in a sentence with other words that still leave that sentence grammatically sound does not somehow vanquish the original logic. If you follow your thinking here, clothes and hair cuts become a problem.
Do you really think hair dye is as invasive and permanent - “no different” - as surgery?
The reason I am arguing that from a “theologically standpoint” it is different is because the essence is completely different. This is also why there are degrees of sin.
You’re thinking substance and essence are equatable, one and the same, but they are not.
There is a categorical difference between a minor flirtation with the pull of vanity and jumping into bed with it head first. That category is essence.
Thus I don’t worry about the self-esteem of a woman who has highlights. I do worry about the self-esteem of a woman with ridiculously giant fake breasts. According to you, this is wrong.
Why?
Many, many things share substance but they are positive or negative morally according to essence. Like sexual function. Would you say that since fornication involves engaging in the exact same physical act that such a fact somehow degrades marital relations? Of course you wouldn’t. Because they are essentially different.
Ice and steam share identical substance, but their essence is completely different, in fact opposite. One heats, one cools; they aren’t equal merely because they are substantially the same, right?
In the same way, the essence of make-up or a hairstyle to mark group identity is completely different from the essential effects of surgical permanent altering motivated by the sign-value attached to secondary sexual characteristics.
I would completely support any good moral person engaging in non-permanent improvements to their self-image, even though my wife and I choose not to dye our own hair (IOW I’m not arguing something from which I have to gain.)
I would cautiously councel any person wishing to gain self-esteem through the surgical implantation of man-made objects.
Breast lifts aren’t what I’m speaking of. Merely that there is a theological difference between combing one’s hair (though God made it rather frizzy) and implanting silicone, and our fear of relativism should not make us so quick to box things together that we allow others, by their understanding that one thing doesn’t belong in that box, to rationalize that neither does the other.
Peace,
RMN
2
2angels
Guest
The intent of both is the same. I believe intent is the important factor in determining morality. The intent of both is what would make them immoral. Therein lies the similarity.
The essense of any difference you refer to is the risk factor. Your statement assumes risk makes things immoral. Risk alone doesn’t make things immoral.
The essense of any difference you refer to is the risk factor. Your statement assumes risk makes things immoral. Risk alone doesn’t make things immoral.
R
Ravemacneil
Guest
Risk factor? Risk of what? I’m also at a loss on how exactly you define “intent”.
The intent in grooming and clothing customs is to show self-respect and respect for the community.
The intent of cosmetic breast implants is to provoke a sexual response from the community and to channel that attention into a hoped-for sense of esteem.
If it’s all the same, are you advocating everyone be bald? Isn’t that the ony way to remove the intent of caring for our hair to make us look nice to ourselves and others?
Should we wear sackcloth?
What is the “intent” of wearing deodorant? To not appear offensive to the standards of our community, is it not? Which is also the intent of reasonable grooming, no?
I guess I just disagree. Intending to look like a decent, self-respecting man for work and friends will never be in the same box to me as intending to sexually provoke a response with big fake breasts.
One is about respect. The other is about sexual attention. One’s a square peg, the other a round hole.
But I accept your disagreement, my friend,
RMN
The intent in grooming and clothing customs is to show self-respect and respect for the community.
The intent of cosmetic breast implants is to provoke a sexual response from the community and to channel that attention into a hoped-for sense of esteem.
If it’s all the same, are you advocating everyone be bald? Isn’t that the ony way to remove the intent of caring for our hair to make us look nice to ourselves and others?
Should we wear sackcloth?
What is the “intent” of wearing deodorant? To not appear offensive to the standards of our community, is it not? Which is also the intent of reasonable grooming, no?
I guess I just disagree. Intending to look like a decent, self-respecting man for work and friends will never be in the same box to me as intending to sexually provoke a response with big fake breasts.
One is about respect. The other is about sexual attention. One’s a square peg, the other a round hole.
But I accept your disagreement, my friend,
RMN
J
JayLynn
Guest
I find this debate very interesting. I have struggled with this issue myself. I was always on the smaller side and that didn’t bother me too much, but now after breast feeding several children, they are smaller then ever and don’t have a very desirable shape anymore.
My husband does not complain, but I still do find it effects our level of intimacy. I know it’s silly, but when I feel less attractive, I feel less inclined to intimacy. I know it makes a difference, because when I am pregnant or nursing, they regain their original size and shape and I am much more willing to to be intimate with my husband, because I feel more attractive.
It’s not that I want to get super giant fake breasts, all I want is to have a moderate size (maybe a B or C) and a decent shape, that makes me fit into my size of clothing better (I’m fairly tall and they don’t allow for tall flat women in many clothing designs) and makes me more confident for my husband. I have no desire to run around in low-cut tops and draw attention to myself.
My husband does not complain, but I still do find it effects our level of intimacy. I know it’s silly, but when I feel less attractive, I feel less inclined to intimacy. I know it makes a difference, because when I am pregnant or nursing, they regain their original size and shape and I am much more willing to to be intimate with my husband, because I feel more attractive.
It’s not that I want to get super giant fake breasts, all I want is to have a moderate size (maybe a B or C) and a decent shape, that makes me fit into my size of clothing better (I’m fairly tall and they don’t allow for tall flat women in many clothing designs) and makes me more confident for my husband. I have no desire to run around in low-cut tops and draw attention to myself.
M
mgreen77
Guest
No, that’s an unfair generalization of women. Not everything revolves around men. Some women simply want to look and feel normal and proportional for their body type to their OWN eyes.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
I would assume that the Catholic Church was against it (along with all purely cosmetic surgery).
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
Based on that same logic it would be immoral to restore the sight of someone who lost their vision due to natural causes. Or for that matter to ‘play God’ by performing any life saving procedures.
A
AngryAtheist8
Guest
How the heck would anyone today know what kind of figure the Virgin Mary had?
Are you saying that flat-chested women are more Godly
D
didymus
Guest
You can’t have it both ways.
If God is the Master of the Universe He gives people big ears and cancer.
Or He’s not and **it just happens.
- Status