Need an argumentative essay on Skin Deep. Needs to be 3 pages. Please no plagiarism.Download file to see previous pages... A recent newspaper article in the New York Times by Natasha Singer, dated Oct

Need an argumentative essay on Skin Deep. Needs to be 3 pages. Please no plagiarism.

A recent newspaper article in the New York Times by Natasha Singer, dated October 4, 2007, titled "SKIN DEEP. Is the 'Mom Job' Really Necessary" reveals an interesting trend in this regard. This essay shall analyze the mentioned article and study its relevance, and the way in which the article corresponds to the ideas and issues discussed by Emma Goldman in "Love and Marriage" and "Woman Suffrage." The essay shall argue that, while the article is well presented in terms of the main argument, the limitation of the article is that the empirical evidences cited by Singer do not present the dangers of the surgical treatment adequately. The article is indeed very relevant to the thoughts expressed by Goldman.

Natasha Singer reports about the cosmetic changes that are brought about in a women's body by means of plastic surgery. She discusses the work of Dr. Stoker in California, who promises a "surgical cure for the ravages of motherhood" called "Mommy makeover." Singer sets the reader thinking with her title "Skin Deep. Is the Mom Job Really Necessary" Providing adequate information about what the surgery actually does on the women who go in for the treatment, and why women agree to take the treatment in the words of Dr. Stoker, Singer then begins her attack on such extreme steps taken by women, despite the involved risks of high cost and danger to life.

The main argument of Singer as can be understood in two parts: a) women who had altered bodies after childbirth, lost their self-esteem regarding their attractiveness and femininity because of the changed definition of beauty in modern times, with media pressure exacerbating the problem. b) They resorted to the readily available technology to modify their bodies in order to fulfill their cosmetic aspirations even at the risk of hefty expenditure, and danger to life.

Singer supports first part of her argument well, and the cost factor in the second part. She states that "narrowing beauty norms are recasting the transformations of motherhood as stigma" and examines the role of the media in accentuating the situation:

"...unforgiving standards are the offspring of pop culture and technologyGossip magazines excoriate celebrity moms who don't immediately lose their ''baby weight'' a luxury parenting magazinedescribed post-pregnancy breasts as ''the ultimate indignity'' and promoted implant surgery." (Singer 1)

Citing Diana Zuckerman, the president of the National Research Center for Women and Families, Singer further supports her argument of pressurized mothers, stating that the "the post-pregnancy body" was transformed ''into a socially unacceptable thing," (Singer 1) to suit the marketing goals of plastic surgeons, who could profit from the operations. She provides statistics from the Society of Plastic Surgeons, to point to the increasing numbers - "325,000 ''mommy makeover procedures'' on women ages 20 to 39, up 11 percent from 2005" (Singer 2). Singer cites Dr. Stoker and Dr. Huffaker to give the reader of the cost -ranging from $10,000-30,000.

However, the empirical evidences of the women operated, like "Katie Helein" and "Ms.