Artificial Self Improvement

Published on December 8, 2004 By iamheather In Current Events

Cher had plastic surgery, everywhere.

Madonna changes her hair color, often.

Newsanchors receive botox.

Models pay for breasts.

Movie stars nip and tuck.

Even Presidential candidates, sculpt and define.

Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi and Gary Sheffield used steroids.

Why are all but the latter accepted practices of altering the body for career advancement except the last?

Is it the health issue? All of them have some research somewhere alleging deleterious effects, even hair color.

Is it the competitive nature of athletics? Aren't cinema celebrities, models, presidents competitve professions, too?

Is it because of the deceptive nature? Why do we accept forms of deception in some professions but not in others?

Why is one cheating and the others self-improvement?

I am interested in what you think, JU?

Comments (Page 1)

historyishere

on Dec 08, 2004

I think a better comparison would be using a crib sheet on an exam.... and look at how foamy I got over the whole lip synching thing(another form of cheating)

iamheather

on Dec 08, 2004

I think a better comparison would be using a crib sheet on an exam....

So you go along the lines of cheating. Why is it cheating to use steroids, in your opinion? I don't know the answers. It is just something I have been pondering.

Danny Bassette

on Dec 08, 2004

Athletics is about what you can do with your body through training, not chemistry. It's a real person doing a real thing. Entertainment (acting, models, and in many way presidents) are all about appearance. It's fake people doing fake things. Leastwise that's my quick thought on the topic

historyishere

on Dec 08, 2004

Well, aside from the modeling example, the body alterations don't improve the way the recepient does their job... an actor can act just as well without alteration, a singer can sing without plastic surgery....

However, because steroids change the way an athlete can perform, it allows for an unfair advantage on the field, and I think that because sports are sort of predicated on the theory that a contest is FAIR, having players who are artificially enhanced runs contrary to this expectation.

iamheather

on Dec 08, 2004

Thanks, Danny. At least you can reach an opinion. I haven't decided on one yet. Looking for advice.

iamheather

on Dec 08, 2004

Would you agree that the reason celebrities do these things though is to "advance their career." It does improve the way they are perceived to do their job.

Thank you for explaining though, history. I was interested in everyone's opinion. Zombie and I have been discussing this today.

Danny Bassette

on Dec 08, 2004

You wanted my opinion? That wasn't my opinoin, that was an attempt to explain why the one is considered fine and the other isn't. My opinion is that it's all silly (with the possible exception of dying hair, which is silly in a different way). You should work with what you have and not slice/dice/drug yourself around just for fun and profit. Now if you say, lost an arm or some such, then surgery or any of that other stuff in an attempt to compensate would be different, ie acceptable. Course, in the end I say it's your body do what you will with it.

ParaTed2k

on Dec 08, 2004

We can all name celebrities, politicians and journalists who obviously got where they were on talent, ability, some good timing and any other reason than their looks (Geddy Lee, Prs. Bush & Heraldo... just to name a few) .

All this contraversy over steriod use puts the suspected athelete in the same class as the celebrities, politicians and journalists who obviously had little more than looks (real or through the marvels of modern technology).

I don't ever remember wondering when was the last time a celebrity broke records because of the "alterations", but I can't help but wonder how long it's been since a sports record was set without "help".

kingbee

on Dec 08, 2004

it never fails to amuse me how the perception of drug use (by athletes specifically but...) seems to shift from one pole to the other. in the early 60s, soviet bloc olympians--especially east german women--were all but accused of enjoying an unfair advantage. in the late 60s, early thru mid 70s, pro drug-using athletes were condemned for cheating fans, teammates, owners because the substances interferred with performance. in the 80s, it was once again unfair advantage. late 80s thru 90s, darrel strawberry and others were examples of how drugs impair natural abilities. and now were back to performing beyond ability.

it may seem extreme but maybe they should fill a hat with a variety of substances and make every competitor or player reach in blindly and pick a couple doses at random a couple hours before each event? if nothin else, it might make some sports (like golf) a lot more watchable not knowing when someone on the tour was gonna go into the zone.

ParaTed2k

on Dec 08, 2004

it was once again unfair advantage. late 80s thru 90s, darrel strawberry and others were examples of how drugs impair natural abilities. and now were back to performing beyond ability.

So what you are saying is...

"One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small... and the ones that mother gives you, don't do anything at all..."

iamheather

on Dec 08, 2004

Danny

that was an attempt to explain why the one is considered fine and the other isn't. My opinion is that it's all silly (with the possible exception of dying hair, which is silly in a different way). You should work with what you have and not slice/dice/drug yourself around just for fun and profit.

I tend to agree, but still wonder why we condemn some and not the others.

Lord knows I have gone through my share of hair dyes....

ParaTed2K

All this contraversy over steriod use puts the suspected athelete in the same class as the celebrities, politicians and journalists who obviously had little more than looks (real or through the marvels of modern technology).I don't ever remember wondering when was the last time a celebrity broke records because of the "alterations", but I can't help but wonder how long it's been since a sports record was set without "help".

Yes, but when was the last time a journalist or celebrity achieved historical stardom based on "alterations?" Or became more popular? Isn't it much the same?

*Disclaimer, I am not promoting one view over another. I am still in the contemplation mode.*

kingbee

I agree....could be interesting....after all, golf is monotonous....

btw...glad to see ya here, kingbee.

ParaTed2k

on Dec 08, 2004

Yes, but when was the last time a journalist or celebrity achieved historical stardom based on "alterations?" Or became more popular? Isn't it much the same?

The "alterations" didn't make give them more range or talent. They do get them noticed, but if you are talking about "historical stardom" very few who don't have the talent underneath ever gain that.

It's kind of like one older baseball player said today (if anyone knows who it was or even the exact quote, feel free to chime in)...

No steriod or any other drug can improve the batter's chances of hitting a fast ball or a change up. Hoever they can make the difference between a base hit and a home run.

I know for me, I really don't care how many home runs a drug can hit. If it isn't he athele's talent and hard work hitting it, it's worthless.

iamheather

on Dec 08, 2004

No steriod or any other drug can improve the batter's chances of hitting a fast ball or a change up. Hoever they can make the difference between a base hit and a home run.I know for me, I really don't care how many home runs a drug can hit. If it isn't he athele's talent and hard work hitting it, it's worthless.

Very interesting, ParaTed2k. I am not a baseball fan, but will have to contemplate your comment.

Thank you, and I like you more and more as I learn about your beliefs and read your blogs.

kingbee

on Dec 08, 2004

"One pill makes you larger, and one pill makes you small... and the ones that mother gives you, don't do anything at all..."

yikes! ya know grace slick might be an example of someone who shoulda never cleaned up her act hahahaha

kingbee

on Dec 08, 2004

golf is monotonous....

btw...glad to see ya here, kingbee.

watchin paint dry is monotonous. golf is like the watchin paint dry of monotonous hahaha

appreciate the hospitality and graciousness (not to mention i aint been booted outta here yet )

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!