Judith Warner's column today most likely gave Suffragettes, Sappho, and all of our Feminist Foremothers the vapors today.
Seriously.
How else to react to the following:
The health care reform bill currently being debated in the Senate contains a provision known as the Bo-Tax — so called because it would levy a 5 percent tax on cosmetic surgery procedures. The idea is to tax those who indulge in medically unnecessary procedures in order to pay for medical necessities for everyone else.
This sounded like a refreshingly good idea to me, until I read that Terry O’Neill, the president of the National Organization for Women, is against it.
“Now they are going to put a tax on middle-aged women in a society that devalues them for being middle-aged?” she complained to The Times.
The tone of Warner's column is incredulous, as is my reaction to it. So many things to be concerned about in the Healthcare bill, and the President of NOW is objecting to the five percent plastic surgery tax?
O'Neill argues that middle-aged women face so much discrimination in the job market that many of them must lie about their age. In order to do that, they must appear younger than their years; hence the need for Botox, tummy tucks, and all the other things women do to themselves to erase the signs that they are passing out of their reproductive years.
Warner's column is worth reading. And her questioning the fear that drives someone like O'Neill--that all women secretly fear they are going to wind up as bag ladies, despite their wealth--is perhaps dead-on in its accuracy.
But I find myself unable to feel sympathy for these women.
First of all, plastic surgery is expensive and is not covered by insurance. So, an extra five percent is hardly Draconian. I doubt it will keep the privileged few who can afford it from getting it. And, if it's true that middle-aged women are terrified that they will lose their jobs or not be able to find jobs without it, we are talking about women who are looking for jobs in the upper strata of the working world.
In other words, this sounds suspiciously like a white, upper middle-class feminist complaint. I thought that feminists had realized that they needed to embrace class and race as issues within feminism? If defending white middle-class women's access to the Botox deprives a poor, white woman of an opportunity to get an abortion (because, say, someone trades their vote on the Stupak amendment for this Stupid amendment), how does that help bring women together?
I thought that, as older women, we were to have been taught to embrace our wrinkles. Our laugh lines. Our worry lines. Our creases. These are our badges of honor, they show we have lived, loved, and watched a world that is often unfair to us all.
My sense is that as feminists, we need to be fighting for things that affect us all, and I can't help but see this as a problem that affects primarily white, upper middle-class women. Am I wrong?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
emma peel 2
Donald Manns
The Flylooper
Vivian Henoch
Lydieth A
Sean Murphy
Salon.com
Comments
But seriously, this does bring up a lot of interesting questions and food for discussion. The discrimination against older women in the workplace is very real. Let's start there. That alone keeps us economically disadvantaged and with less money to retire on than men.
I agree that older women are discriminated against. We know that women retire with less money than men. But I don't see the five percent plastic surgery tax as being particularly onerous to anyone who can already afford plastic surgery. I hear what the President of NOW is saying, and I think there are other battles we should be fighting for: equal pay acts, or equal access, or harassment in the workplace laws, proper enforcement of EEOC regulations. This tax fight seems trivial. If you can convince me otherwise, I'm all ears.
yes, you look better, more rested, maybe healthier, surely you're neatened up in a way. but younger because you're face has been stretched over the core of bones. I think a face lift is not going to get someone a job anytime soon. perhaps they can add premium services to any healthcare plan, so that if you want face lifts, okay. you'll pay X premium, maybe X deductible or however they'd structure the fees.
EVERYone is discriminated according to age. in a society where we have we have an excess of people, why wouldn't they be? we do not value experience. when we do, we do. but generally speaking we value good looks. we value superficial. so we value youth.
I think it's great that you had the resources to pay for your Botox. That's fantastic, and I didn't mean to swipe so broadly. I should remove the sentence because I don't want to alienate my sisters.
However, if I felt that my tax dollars were subsidizing plastic surgery, I might have more of a problem. As you said, provocative thing to discuss. I'll take the snark out of my tone.
This is good stuff. I really appreciate you addressing issues like this. In the scheme of what’s important in regard to the health care issue (now the “affordable insurance” issue I guess) focusing attention and resources on things like this risks trivializing the voice that activist organizations could and should have in regard to major parts of legislation.
Rated and appreciated.
Myself, I haven't seen that sort of discrimination. I've worked in 3 Fortune 50 companies; the women who rise to the top are invariably middle aged, as are their male counterparts.
I do not know the answer to the questions I raise.
How do these women afford the plastic surgery? I understand it's prohibitively affordable? I've heard of boyfriends and husbands buying their wives boob jobs for Xmas, but do young women save their money for this type of surgery?
that said, jk brady makes a couple of interesting points.
I reject this premise in the first place. There is no transparency or oversight when it comes to taxing. So they throw a 5% tax in on cosmetic procedures [which yes, mostly target women, thank you] and you will never, ever know where that tax money goes. So No More Taxing!
How about the cigarette tax? A cigarette tax is often explained as a way to make up for the costs imposed on society by smokers and to discourage smoking. But cigarette excise taxes can (and often are) used to support other state-budget purposes.
How about lottery profits? They are supposed to go toward education and schools, treatment programs and local causes. Really? And when was the last time you actually saw that happen?
Taxes such as these are an insidious way to take more money from the taxpayer to line somebodys' pocket who doesn't deserve it. The utopian hope that such a tax would actually help pay for another persons necessary healthcare is just that: utopian.
So I agree with N.O.W. but for a different reason.
It's a thorny issue, for the reasons brought up by Deborah and Mary. But I still think there are bigger fish to fry in the healthcare debate than a Botox tax.
Maybe that's just because I'm still young and am discriminated against on the other end of the spectrum; I'm a young female, therefore my experiences must be discounted.
(thumbified while checking my own crow's feet for planks)
R
Rated
Give me a bloody break.
Gah.
The first person I worked for who'd had a facelift was a 50-something GUY, but the way. O'Neill might want to check her assumptions at the door.
I'm 29.
He's 28.
The mind boggles.
That said, I'm in agreement with you about this--a 5% charge on cosmetic procedures (except reconstructive surgery) to pay for medical services for the poor seems fair.
I knew you'd be posting on this, which is why I came back to OS for a visit. This issue has been very much on my mind for the last 5 or so years because I don't like what is happening to my jaw line. Plus, there is also the added pressure of being surrounded by a group of women that parent my kids' friends that have had some plastic surgery or other non surgical procedures like BOTOX or fillers.
Even though I am in the income group that can probably afford to pay for some plastic surgery, I have decided that as a gerontologist, a woman and a feminist, I am going to remain steadfast in avoiding it and let my face age naturally. If I did succumb, I have decided that I would feel like I had turned my back on 'my people' (women of a similar age that are only going to grow older as I do who are pressured like I am. I just don't feel right contributing to that).
It's also a class issue -- pretty soon, if not now, we will be able to discern socioeconomic status by the pouty lips, triangle shaped eyebrows and frozen faces of women of a nonspecific age.
I don't mean to divide women. I just feel like it's almost an act against the sisterhood.
Denese
hi Lorraine,
i don't feel like signing up so that i can post a comment, but i thought i'd respond directly. it's a very interesting question.
i used to work at a private plastic surgery clinic, during the years of my undergrad degree in gender and women's studies (in Canada - plastic surgery is not covered by our public health insurance if it is cosmetic). as you can imagine, the experience was quite unique and presented many conflicting perspectives.
what i came to find was that younger and younger women (late 30s/early 40s) were coming in looking for facelifts where they were not indicated for them (i.e., their skin laxity was not severe enough to allow for surgical intervention - not enough loose skin to stretch, basically), as well as older women (our oldest patient was in her late 70s/early 80s) for social reasons - their husbands were leaving them, they were looking to re-enter the work force after raising children, they were changing jobs or perhaps had been passed over for a promotion, or they just felt like they were not beautiful and didn't like that feeling. invariably these women felt that their physical appearance was a liability to them in the pursuit of their goals.
these were women from all kinds of financial backgrounds - not just the most wealthy. some women had been saving their money for literally years and years to be able to afford their surgery. one woman paid in cash she had been saving under her mattress for 12 years. some were from very small rural communities, where it would be difficult to imagine that their lives would change dramatically as a result of their surgery. many were retired. one of the most heartbreaking instances was an older woman (late 50s early 60s) who told me she was having a facelift because she "felt invisible." i remember her in particular because her post-surgical period was hampered by a serious life-threatening infection that required hospitalization (thus triggering public funds to be diverted to her care, if you're wondering). i think most women were looking for an internal sense of satisfaction and confidence so that they felt capable of going out and achieving their goals and being met with positive external responses. the common thread is that all these women experienced overwhelming social pressure to conform to beauty standards that they felt was impossible to do without surgery.
ultimately, i agree with the sentiment that the tax on plastic surgery is unfair to women. after having up-close and personal contact with thousands of women who experienced these kinds of pressures and were willing to submit their bodies and faces to surgery and other procedures for revision, i had a lot more sympathy than i did when i took the job, and a lot more than i might have had if i had only been studying gender theory and not working in that environment simultaneously. i went into the job for the money, to help with tuition, and i brought with me an attitude that these women were weak and frivolous for submitting to social pressures in this way. i came out with a deeper understanding of just how complex and intense these pressures are, and the extent to which some women are willing to go in order to meet them - as both physical and financial burdens and risks (which often extended to travel expenses and recovery time away from work, as well as increased debtload, as many women took out loans for their surgery). these women were far from frivolous, and far from weak. they were women who were making difficult and complicated decisions in the face of enormous social pressure and gender oppression. remember, even wealthy women (not that all our patients were wealthy, by any stretch - and i believe the prices our surgeons charged are pretty high in comparison to the prices in many areas of the US, where free market competition in health care services has driven prices down) are still subject to gender oppression, one of the facets of which is actually femininity and the practice thereof. i still think there is a lot to criticise about plastic surgery (for example, the majority of plastic surgeons are male, which presents its own problems of those surgeons possibly imposing their own opinions and artistic visions on their patients in literal ways), but it certainly isn't a black and white issue.
i think it's definitely very important - even more so - to be concerned about and speak out against the other initiatives that are threatening women's health in your country. but i don't think that speaking out against this tax necessarily detracts from or prevents speaking out against the Stupak amendment, or other state laws that are preventing reproductive health access. it's not an either/or.
that turned out long - i guess i have a lot to say about this topic! anyway, thanks for reading, and for initiating the discussion. you're quite welcome to repost this email, or use parts of it if you wish -- i used to blog under the name Thinking Girl http://thinkinggirl.wordpress.com/ (no time to do that these days), so just credit that name if you decide you want to make use of any of this.
The biggest problem that ordinary (middle to low income) people face, in terms of plastic surgery, is the inevitable letdown of seeing problems persist post-surgery. I've seen it.
Personally, feminist that I am, if I had the money I'd have the wrinkles removed from my neck in a minute.
I'd like a tummy tuck. My lumbar spine collapsed down and to the side. I lost two inches in spinal length, right at my waist. I look fat and out of shape and I'm not. I don't look abnormal or like I was in a terrible accident, but I want to look like I would without the degenerative disc disease. I'll never be able to afford this.
I already have the incision for it. They could just go in where the old operation scar is. I had an abdominal surgery when I was young. I got a surgical infection. The doctor charmingly cut me open again (no anesthesia) and scraped my flesh clean, many times over the course of weeks. I was not sewn up. I got a big, fat, uneven scar on my belly. I hated it for years. When I could afford it, I had a cosmetic surgeon fix it. Not covered by insurance, not deductible from my taxes. But a relief.
I'm going to have some varicose veins removed. I had incredibly painful knee surgery a couple of years ago, and part of the surgery involved pumping air into the knee capsule. Ruptured a bunch of blood vessels downstream. Looks ugly in a skirt without hose. I'm getting rid of those puppies.
Yes, it is all vanity. But should I pay extra for my bad luck? I am most definitely a feminist and I like my laugh lines, a lot. I got them laughing and smiling.
Cosmetic surgery is expensive, unnecessary, and often ugly. It distorts a person's features and makes them the target for constant gossip. Anyone who thinks she is getting away with something by altering her face and body is living in la la land. It will end with a crash, and when it does THEN what? You still have to face old age and the cruelty of a culture that doesn't even question its youth obsession. Hiding out in a younger looking body won't change a thing. It only changes you, and ruins your spirit.
When I stopped dying my hair and all the silver grew out, I was shocked at first. But then I decided: Fuck anybody who can't deal with it. And I started to feel differently about myself. I started to like myself--for the first time.
You know who had the worst time dealing with my real look? My closest girlfriend. We had to break up, actually, because she was becoming so disrespectful toward me. I was baffled until I realized that her agitation and meanness coincided with my change in appearance. As I went grayer and grayer, she treated me more and more like the mother she despised. Some of these issues are buried deep, and if you're not willing to root them out you won't change or learn.
Our need to be seen as girls is just as deep-rooted and ugly. It has many causes, and many repercussions. But choosing not to deal with it will not make it go away. Surgery is only a postponement of the inevitable. And it distracts us from making real changes in how we treat one another.
I understand the need to fix some part of yourself that you're unhappy with. I have scars on my abdomen from a surgery, and the surgery has created a bulge on one side that makes me self-conscious in a bikini.
I keep thinking about the words from the Bonnie Raitt song:
I see my folks are getting on
And I watch their bodies change
I know they see the same in me
And it makes us both feel strange
No matter how you tell yourself
It's what we all go through
Those lines are pretty hard to take
When they're staring back at you
Some days, I wish I had taken better care of my face. Other days, I think fuck it. This is who I am. I never thought I'd be a person who would envy younger women, and one day, I was having a moment of envy watching a woman wearing an outfit that I felt I wouldn't fit into.
And then, like Anne Lamott says in Traveling Mercies, it hit me: she doesn't like her body either. Here I was thinking she had a beautiful body, and I would guess that she really didn't like parts of her own body.
We live in a fucked-up culture that is obsessed with youth and beauty. Women have been its targets for years, but I know enough men who tell me that they feel it, too.
So, if you have the money to do it, and you honestly believe that getting something fixed is going to change the way you feel about yourself, who am I to stop you? On the other hand, if you think that the cause of all your problems is the physical imperfection, what are you going to blame when you fix the problem but you're still unhappy?
That's what I think about. Even if I was gorgeous, would I feel the same way? I have found my own way to happiness. And even when I'm depressed, I don't think that changing my looks will change it. (Although, on my worst days, I think if I lost ten pounds, my life would be perfect.)
But when it comes down to it, I don't want to pay for someone else's vanity project. Medically necessary plastic surgery--and I would include cleft palates in this--yes. Of course. But Botox? No.
Ironically, one of the treatments for Cluster headaches is Botox. My insurance company won't cover it even though it's not for cosmetic purposes. I haven't decided what I will do if the insurance company caves on this. Am I willing to change my looks to get rid of my headaches?
My mother had hers removed about 10 years ago, and it was covered under insurance.
And it's not just women who partake or middle aged women at that. I know a significant number of young women with fake tits, Botoxed faces, and inflatable lips. You should see the men in my gym with their creepy calf implants. Has anyone taken a good look at Kenny Rogers?
I get taxed when I drink. I get taxed when I buy petrol. I get taxed when I buy cigarettes. I get taxed when I buy chocolate. Those are all luxury items in my world. The woman who wants to change her face to look like her cat should get taxed too.
I would be willing to fly to Mexico to have it done for less money in a good facility, and I would go for a facelift. I don't want to fool around with Botox. Maybe by then something else will have been invented that is as good as a face lift and non-invasive.
I am a life-long feminist as most here know, but having plastic surgery doesn't make me any less of a feminist than wearing lipstick or pretty dresses does. Would it be wonderful to live in a world where everyone (men included) ages gracefully? Of course. But I think it is human nature for most of us to want to improve on our looks and now we have the ability to do it if we can pay for it, which means I'd better start saving NOW.
I have met many successful/powerful women and men and many of them have not had surgery and they are comfortable with that. I don't want to look any older than I have to, but I want to look natural, not like some of the horror shows I've seen walking around.
There's something so weird and unhealthy about all of this:
'But how is plastic surgery an acceptable form of controlling the body whereas anorexia nervosa/bulimia are not?' Exactly! What a very good question. We're going to die, all of us, shouldn't we grow up a bit first. I mean I'm not there yet. I'm fighting age and hating most of it but I think I know where I need to aim my energies and I don't think it's at postponing the inevitable.I think it's finding some way to accept it, even love it. What kind of world is this where we cannot be ourselves.
Whether or not women should have plastic surgery is, to me, a separate debate. The question is whether piddling little taxes on middle class women are really the way we create a just society and fund a health care program.
And is it true that NOW has been silent on all the atrocities in the package? Have they been silent on exclusion of abortion. Or are you telling them they don't have the right to talk about anything else? Or maybe you're suggesting that a %5 tax is a brilliant way to distract feminists from the fact that the right to choose has been taken off the table. But then haven't you and Warner fallen into the trap by jumping into this extremely trivial debate?
I'm with JK on this. The fact that it isn't covered is prohibitive enough. If they want a health care tax, then tax Rogaine or something. Or better yet tax private jets, company cars, salaries that are more than 20 times what base employees make, and eliminate expense accounts. Then after you've done all that start taxing our low self esteem.
Issues like beauty and self-alteration (which some theorists see as a form of vengeful "female castration") actually offer a link between women in rich countries and those in developing ones, where more direct enslavement of the body still takes place. The fact that global capitalism is the tissue that connects all these things is simply not evident in a less radical critique, and that is where I would level charges of bourgeois blindness. Rated.
I understand that some can see this as nitpicking, or divisive, but I'm tired of feminism choosing battles that are not worth fighting. A five percent luxury tax. Please. Go ahead. If it gets us the healthcare bill and allows us to keep abortion rights, than yes, bring it on. I think as feminists we do have more important things to be focusing on. So why is O'Neill even talking about the Botox tax?
Juliet--this is a luxury tax. Plastic surgery is a luxury. Of course we should be taxing the shit out of the obscene CEO bonuses, and corporations that don't pay taxes. I'm not oblivious to that. I was working as a waitress in the early 1980s when Ronald Reagan decided that servers needed to be paying their fair share of taxes. So the year Boeing paid nothing in taxes, I got hammered. The tax system is unfair. The fact that the healthcare system has to pay for itself while we can march off to endless war without paying the bills is obscene. But it doesn't make it any less silly, or wrong, that NOW is defending women who can afford plastic surgery from paying a 5 percent tax.
I don't know if I'm making sense, but it seems to me that if we don't challenge each other and support each other we're letting the tribe (of women of which we are a part) down.
Denese
Yet many of the comments her ehave made me rethink my kneejerk what-are-those-upper-middle-class-women-complaining-about response. That's the thing about sexism, even for us feminists. It gets in our bones, and we have these kneejerk responses, which makes it hard to join together to fight discrimination against women and ageism--which is real, god knows.
Still, I'd really like to return to that brief time when loving our bodies just the way they are--sagging, creassed, lined with sadness and laughter--was the utopian feminist goal.
And it makes me wonder that anyone thinks it is a feminist issue when it panders to the false values of our culture.
Saying that, I will still get my hair updated in time to apply for jobs in my new career....
Hey Lorraine,
Is that a doxie puppy as your avatar?? Cute!
I've been thinking about Juliet's comments all night, and now yours, too, JK. I hear where you are coming from. And, I agree. It's not my business if a woman is so concerned about her looks that she feels the need to get plastic surgery. (And can we please keep in mind that UNLIKE ABORTION, men get plastic surgery, too). Unlike abortion, plastic surgery is frequently not a life-or-death decision. I can see it being an economic decision if a woman or man really feels that they are denied employment because they are too unpresentable for public view. But, since Congress is INSISTENT that this bill has to pay for itself, unlike the war bills, which apparently are financed by Santa Claus, the money has to come from somewhere. Let's face it. This is a punitive, luxury tax. I see it as the equivalent of saying, "If you an afford to buy a $100,000 automobile, you can afford to pay extra tax." Or, "If you can afford to buy a second house, you can afford not to get the same tax credit." 5 percent tax on a procedure that insurance doesn't cover may be enough that it will prevent some people from having it. I'm sorry for that.
But I think that there are so many other issues on the table with the health bill that losing a moment's energy, as NOW is doing, by spending their time trying to prevent this tax from going through, bothers me.
What if a representative trades their vote on this for something more important in the health bill? Are you willing to trade this for a vote against the Stupak Amendment?
I agree with you. This is a red herring. But it's NOW that has chomped on the bait. If they're going to spend time fighting this tax, does this take time away from fighting the Stupak Amendment? Will other women lose out because we're saving other men and women five percent on their plastic surgery bill?
I am not trying to set up an argument between the value of plastic surgery and staying natural. I know it's an easy argument to fall into, and I'm guilty of it, too. (I should disclose that I have had a piercing, which I guess counts as body modification.) But what I don't want is for us to get so caught up in defending the right of people to have plastic surgery that we lose the important stuff.
Does that make sense?
I aplogize, Juliet and JK and anyone else, if I came across as refusing to acknowledge your argument. I had to sleep on it for it to become clear to me.
Last night as I was going on and on about refusing plastic surgery my husband said, "Wait just a minute, that's all you have been talking about over the last 5 or 10 years." He's right. I just want my tribe of women friends to join me in talking me out of it.
I do think it's a personal development and a spiritual issue. Growing old is just one of the really tough things that requires all of us to do the hard work that we have to do in this life. Or so says denese.
XOXO
But tobacco taxes are supposed to discourage smoking---they don't, and reduce the cost of smoke to society--they don't do that either. And the states have long since pissed away the tobacco settlement. The biggest disincentive to smoking is that it is now seen as a white trash habit, and you don't have to be white to be white trash. And people like me who don't smoke keep voting to raise the tax, because, hell, I will never pay it.
That is the problem with all sorts of excise taxes. If they work to raise revenue (like the GST in Canada), more power to them. But if they are a disincentive to wasteful behavior, or to punish silliness and extravaganze, they won't work. Big news: rich folks always find the way to push additional costs onto other people.
As a separate issue--one which delves into the actual content of the choice--I'm one who is still not entirely sure I think choosing cosmetic surgery of any kind doesn't help create the discrimination among middle-aged women in the first place. Not to mention the plethora of negative body images plaguing young women. One side of me agrees entirely with Mary--women should be able to choose this freely without judgment from their sisters. The other side of me wishes they just wouldn't choose it to begin with. If no one did, perhaps we'd all be better off.
Have you seen this ?
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/99487
Laugh lines are a good thing. It shows that you've had a good life.
We need to fight age and sex discrimination on all levels and not encourage this unrealistic ideal of looking twenty years younger than you are. How about we start respecting our elders?
Rated for good common sense.
On a personal note, I have poor vision. Both of my eyes are -10, so my contacts are expensive as hell. My vision changes every year, so I need new contacts/glasses every year. What if it is decided that contact are vanity? That means I go back to glasses (more expensive, btw) (actually, RK or Lasik would be cheaper). Never mind that my peripheral vision will be restricted, it will make me look terrible. When I was in high school, I was not only the new kid (we moved every year), but I was the kid with really thick glasses that distorted my eyes and made me look weird. In February of my sophomore year, I got contacts. I assure you, I was the same person, but suddenly people started talking to me. Suddenly, it was, "Marcelle, come over here and join us for this class activity" whereas before it was "not her." Instinctively, we want to be around people who look healthy. Contacts, plastic surgery, they create the illusion of health that allow us to compete. Isn't that what's really important? Having people who are productive in the work force? If plastic surgery allows people to be more productive, then it really is worth it.
Um, do I get a prize for the correct answer.
While not demonizing plastic surgery, I must ask. Did those who colored their hair a century ago expect others to pay for it? Or did they pay a "sin" tax on it? That's the question here, and the question is whether given all the bullshit in the healthcare bill, is this the issue that NOW should have gotten its knickers in a twist about?
I must say. I agree. What seemed so clear to me when I began, became much more muddied and complex as we went through the various arguments. I thank all who took the time to participate in the thread, and I really appreciate that we were all able to do it without resorting to name-calling, etc. It was an actual discussion, not a brawl.
I was also reminded of how uneven dental care is depending on wealth. Insurance will cover front teeth because it's considered important for your self esteem, yet for the poor, they get steel teeth because that's all they are covered for. To me, that seems like the mark of Cain. Steel teeth = poverty and all the stigma attached. That pretty much keeps them in their place.
Putting aside the ego and vanity of O'Neil, I do think this is a feminist issue because I believe that feminism is about civil and equal rights for all, not just women. As far as older women being discriminated against, I'd argue that it was women in general. As a single woman who has experienced discrimination in the work place, I wish that pay was made public and that pay grades were standardized with no slide to them. If you have a certain amount of experience, then you are worth x regardless of gender.
Moreover, it raises $5.8 billion over five years to pay for $849 billion. Reid said this tax was needed to make the numbers work. But these numbers equal slightly over 1/2% of the healthcare bill.
I don't find 1/2% to be a compelling support for the "we had no choice." It was supposed to be in lieu of the tax on cadillac health care plans but they are both in the bill so far. The finance committee and the house already considered and ditched the tax so I don't know why it is coming up again.
2. The tax applies on anything "not necessary to ameliorate a deformity arising from, or directly related to, a congenital abnormality, a personal injury resulting from an accident or trauma, or disfiguring disease."
Is cancer that leads to a mastectomy a "disfiguring disease"?
The statute could be clearer and say reconstructive surgery after cancer. Is melanoma disfiguring? Is Lipodystrophy disfiguring?
Is the IRS determining what constitutes a congenital deformity?
There is a lot riding on the IRS's interpretation of "disfiguring disease." And the IRS's first interpretation is going to be stingy and this will mean that someone is going to have to pay the tax then sue and that sort of sucks for someone with Breast Cancer or AIDS etc.
3. As for NOWs comment, it's an attackable sound bite. I think the LA Times Article point that 60% of cosmetic surgery is performed on people making less than $90 a year. The bill purported to keep tax increases generally to households making well over that amount a year. (Which is why Sanders wants to strip the tax on Cadillac plans b/c the tax will hit the middle class.) So, given that women will pay for 90% of the tax, and given that it is not a tax on the wealthy, then how else is the tax read than a unfair levy on women? We won't tax middle class American's unless they are women? That's not going to work.
Granted, not all women have plastic surgery, but it is still women who are going to pay for the tax. I think now is right to point it out, even if they could have done it in a better way.
During this entire process women have repeatedly been told not to let women's issues ruin healthcare for everyone. Doing the math, women are over half, so no ruining it for everyone...oh, yeah, don't ruin it for the boys.
It's everyone's healthcare bill (supposedly) and I think it's a legitimate gripe. Middle class women are the only members of the middle class to be selected to pay for healthcare. That's just wrong. It's unfortunate the topic is botox. It makes it all seem trite. I think the principal is worth defending however.
As a gay man, I'm used to being thrown under the bus by the Dems. I've been watching them throw women under the bus though out this health care reform and I for one think it sucks. Especially, because they are doing it b/c they know they have your votes anyway. The thing is though, there is enough of you that you all don't have to put up with all this like the rest of us do.
FLW: Great post. Great comments all the way down. Rated.
-e
first of allw e need to change the culture that devalues all but the young and the plastically enhanced.
then we need to ask ourselves whther men should not pay for their own viagra and women for any expensive altering they paln to do to pretend they are not who they are...and then of course they will be taking pills to enhance their desiring, because they are so self absorbed and self critical they havee no longer got an urge to connect to anyone else intimately...well
i say don't tax it let people pay for it themslevses ande do not cover it at all unless it is a necessity by virtue of deformity or the need to repair after injury or cancer.
i also find your pioints above quite good, but the discussion simply depressing.
how can we ever get past the valuation of a sick society about our human worth if we buy into it?
eleanor roosevelt was homely as hell but one of the most truly beautiful women in the world of any generation.
so many people ahve told me they met her becasue she came to their neighborhood house, and that her words and inclusivity of them as poor foster kids or what have you changed their lives.
that's so much more important than hours spent fighting father time to look like a manniquin.
I've gotten a lot of advice in the last few months about my resume. At first I had it going back quite a while because I felt 10 years of experience did not adequately convey my abilities and experience. I was told to take off the years I got my degrees because of age discrimination. Frankly I have no desire to portray myself as anything other than what I am. So I made 2 resumes, one for my chosen field and one for settings to which my skills should theoretically transfer easily but doesn't dwell on the degrees. Plus a very detailed CV that goes back to 1984.
If younger women are discriminated against by employers because they think these women will take a lot of time off to care for their children, wouldn't a woman past her child bearing years be an advantage? Either she won't have any kids or her children will have been grown. So, wouldn't an older woman be equivalent to, say, a man?
But that is really a present for the man, not the woman.
*dramatically throws self across bed and wails