home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=94TT0366>
- <title>
- Apr. 04, 1994: Public Eye
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1994
- Apr. 04, 1994 Deep Water
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- PUBLIC EYE, Page 31
- Less Than Uplifting
- </hdr>
- <body>
- <p>By Margaret Carlson
- </p>
- <p> Women want to be attractive to men; men want to be attractive
- to women. This will ever be so. But why must women, after three
- decades of working toward equality, still spend countless hours
- and endure pain to that end while men get off pretty well with
- a shave and a shine?
- </p>
- <p> The latest instruments of female torture are contraptions with
- names like Wonderbra and Super-Uplift that force a woman's breasts,
- however small, into a harness, creating cleavage of the sort
- enjoyed by Dolly Parton. The maker of Super-Uplift describes
- its product as a feat of engineering (constructed with 46 separate
- components and underwires, a "gate back" for anchoring, and
- ridged shoulder straps to prevent the "embarrassing jellies-on-a-plate
- look"), but it is actually a feat of marketing. Reconvincing
- women that the absence of breasts holds them back is as easy
- as forcing hemlines up or down: it is only a few fashion shows,
- press releases and glossy- magazine features away. When Super-Uplift
- went on sale at Manhattan's Saks Fifth Avenue two weeks ago,
- 489 were bought the first day.
- </p>
- <p> Why are liberated women willing to buy the successor to the
- corset? It does not hurt, but neither is it comfortable. Like
- shoes that never stop rubbing the back of your heel, it is always
- there, doing what nature did not intend, with wires sufficient
- to hold up a suspension bridge and pads that would protect Jim
- Kelly. And for what? To be more appealing? A few minutes ago,
- the Kate Moss waif effect was all the rage, together with its
- requisite minimizer bra--a contraption that could raise your
- voice an octave.
- </p>
- <p> There is a postfeminist argument for the Wonderbra: liberation
- means that women can dress any way they want. No more the little
- bow tie and the boxy gray suit or the Sears orthopedically correct
- underwear beneath it. Women should feel free to be sexy in the
- boardroom as well as the bedroom. But then the message becomes:
- Notice my breasts before you notice my recommendation to go
- long on pork-belly futures.
- </p>
- <p> Replacing dressing-for-success with dressing-for-sex is no leap
- forward. Men don't wear tight pants to get a promotion or a
- new client. By contrast, women lighten, heighten, straighten,
- curl, iron and bleach their hair. Unwanted hair is ripped out
- by its roots with hot wax, shaved, electrolyted and depilated.
- Bound feet may never have caught on here, but high heels that
- force the entire body weight to rest on the tip of the big toe
- are a cause of daily anguish.
- </p>
- <p> Women have endangered themselves with many kinds of surgery.
- It is some comfort that three companies--Dow Corning, Bristol-Myers
- Squibb and Baxter Healthcare--agreed last week to pay $3.7
- billion over 30 years to women claiming they were injured by
- silicone breast implants. But that settlement, the largest ever
- for a class-action suit, does nothing to alter the mentality
- that led as many as 2 million women over the past quarter-century
- to seek the operation in the first place. Only a male model
- or a body builder would think of surgically enhancing a bicep,
- and only in a few cases of dealing with male-pattern baldness
- has a Senator or actor succumbed to scalp-piercing follicle
- transplants. Otherwise, machismo allows for vanity, if at all,
- in terms of toupees and dentures. As long as women think they
- need a lace-trimmed demicup underwire to be valued, parity will
- remain a distant goal. The Wonderbra is not what most women
- were thinking about when they talked about getting control of
- their lives.
- </p>
-
- </body>
- </article>
- </text>
-
-