0 0
Read Time:3 Minute, 13 Second

In 2012 a former flight attendant and glamour model Martina Big opted for breast enhancement surgery. She has continued with the surgery over the past few years, enhancing her natural bust from a 32D to a 32S. The German model loved barbies growing up and the look of glamour models like Katie Price and Pamela Anderson. She also had plastic surgery done on her legs, lips, waist and hips.

Needless to say, we live in a free world where everyone can do what they want. (Within reason). I dislike the idea of plastic surgery because of the health risks that come with it, and because I feel like people should appreciate their natural beauty. That makes me feel a bit hypocritical because I dye my hair and have ear and nose piercings.  How much is too much? I would like to get tattoos someday; that is unnatural too right? How different is plastic surgery from dying your hair, piercings or tattoos?

A bit of surgery is ok, but when it becomes an obsession (i.e Michael Jackson) it becomes dangerous. People can ruin their looks with botox and cosmetic surgery. If this Martina lady is happy with the way she looks then good on her; however her boobs are probably a dangerous health hazard that will cause her tremendous back problems in the future. They look ridiculous and she looked nicer beforehand; 32D is a normal size and there is no need to increase them to the point where you can barely see over the top of them.

An even crazier and slightly more controversial issue is Martina’s tanning obsession. The natural fair skinned blonde lady decided at the beginning of the year to get tanning injections to make her skin darker, now making her look like a black woman. Again, I am against the idea of skin tanning because it can cause skin cancer and people should appreciate their natural skin tone. Dark people want lighter skin, light people want darker skin. But again, it is none of my business what the woman does (I know I’m going round in circles a bit here but I’m trying to present both sides). Her skin looks terrible; she looks burnt, and crispy, and terribly unhealthy. But some are looking at the perspective that she is trying to be a ‘black’ woman.

There is no way to be a black woman. Colour is only skin deep, and black is nothing more than skin pigmentation. The only difference between black and white people is that black people have more melanin in their skin. Martina is now a black woman physically. Besides the health risks of what she is doing, I have no issue with this. If she wants darker skin then that is fine. People on her Facebook page saying she is being ‘racist’ and all sorts of nonsense are being stupid. (If anything she’s the opposite of racist; she loves dark skin so much she wants it on herself). She should probably speak to a therapist to get some clarity as to why she’s harming her health like this but I definitely don’t think she’s being racially insensitive. This is the problem with pigeonholing people into monolithic groups ‘black’ and ‘white.’ Someone commented saying ‘she wants to be black until it’s actually time to be black.’ What the hell is that supposed to mean? What does it mean to ‘be’ black besides to have dark skin and Negroid features?

I think what Martina’s doing is dangerous and shouldn’t be encouraged, and that she looked beautiful before. I also think everyone has a right to do what makes them happy, even if it’s crazy. But I definitely don’t think making her skin darker makes her racist, and you would be foolish to think so too.

About Post Author

zarinamacha

Zarina Macha is an award-winning independent author of five books under her name. In 2021, her young adult novel "Anne" won the international Page Turner Book Award for fiction. She also writes contemporary romance as Diana Vale. She is releasing "Tic Tac Toe" in 2023, a young adult dystopian satire of identity politics and social justice.
Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %

Average Rating

5 Star
0%
4 Star
0%
3 Star
0%
2 Star
0%
1 Star
0%

0 thoughts on “Only Skin Deep

  1. I like the point you made about comparing plastic surgery to tattoos. I don't think dying one's hair or getting piercings are on the same level since they are temporary whereas surgery and tattoos tend to be permanent.

    I agree with most of what you said except this line: "The only difference between black and white people is that black people have more melanin in their skin." Scientifically and medically, that's not true, as they have also have different skull shapes, different blood types – especially related to sickle cell – as well as different DNA patterns.
    (https://anthropology.si.edu/writteninbone/comic/activity/pdf/Identify_ancestry.pdf)
    (https://obi.org/blood-donation/scientific-facts/)
    (http://www.sicklecellsociety.org/resources/why-is-blood-from-afro-caribbean-donors-special/)
    (https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/about/)

    I also don't agree that "If anything she's the opposite of racist" because "she loves dark skin so much she wants it on herself". Being racist has nothing to do with loving or not loving dark skin – or light skin. That's just a personal preference. So I do agree with your overall point that she's not racist for wanting darker skin though.

  2. Ah I can see how having different DNA patterns would make sense, considering Negroids and Caucasoids originate from different parts of the world. Cheers for that.

  3. As in people of african descent (negroids) and people of european descent (caucasiods) originate from different parts of the world. Negroids, Caucasoids and Mongoloids are just the terms given in terms of classification.

  4. They don't originate from different parts of the world though, they all originated from Africa and just left at different times as well as traveled to different regions. What makes them "Negroid", "Caucasoid" or "Mongoloid" has to do with where they spent the most time developing genetically, not where they originated from. People in Europe and Asia etc. have acquired certain specific mutations to adapt to the different environments that they settled in, as well as lost some specific genes that Africans have. It's all about survival. Africans have DNA that is best suited for surviving the environment in Africa; Asians have DNA that is best suited for surviving the environment in Asia. This isn't just limited to skin color but diet, blood PH, eyesight, hearing, strength, speed, agility, thinking patterns, height, weight, built, etc. For example, Africans tend to be the fastest in the world because they live around a lot of fast animal predators. Asians tend to have a specific stomach that digests rice in a different way than other races since they had so much of it around. Whites tend to have more facial and body hair since they tended to live in colder climates.

    70,000 years ago though, there were no "Caucasoids" or "Mongoloids" as we were all "Negroids". (https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/human-journey/)

  5. Yeah I think I worded it wrong, I meant they have different genetic information from different parts of the world due to travelling to other countries and the climates there etc – what you said basically XD

  6. No worries! I'm glad we were able to clarify. Some topics, especially DNA and race, have tricky wordings because of nuances and colloquial speech etc. When in doubt, I tend to ask for clarification to try and eliminate misunderstandings. 🙂

    I'm pretty mixed ethnically, so I've always been really interested in the similarities and differences between cultures, ethnicities and races etc. I know comparing those things has a lot of negative connotations today, but I think that's a shame. I think when one looks at that stuff in an observational and educational way, it can be pretty fascinating and enlightening – like what you did with your "All About Hair" post. 🙂

  7. Cheers! I'm so glad you like reading my posts. What are you mixed with? I'm Asian/African; my dad was born and raised in Tanzania and my mum is of Indian descent and born and raised in Britain. I consider myself culturally British; I wouldn't say I 'identify' with my ethnic background, it's more of a descriptive part of me like being a female or being short (I'm barely 5"3).

  8. As you said, we have many similar viewpoints and overall, I like your attitude and approach. You have a nice balance and it's not too often one finds open-minded people on the internet. So thank you for your posts. 🙂

    Thank you for sharing your mixture with me, I appreciate it. I am mixed with Caucasian, Asian/Pacific Islander & Native American; I was born and raised in America. Ethnically, I think I am pretty American (more so than many in my family). My family is all separated and/or broken apart so I think it helps to highlight some of the ethnic/racial differences between them for me. I've always felt pretty mixed my whole life. (I know what you mean about being short! I'm 5'1" and have often had that word used to describe me.)

Comment your thoughts below!