A recent US health care reform bill calling for a ‘Bo-Tax’ has put the spotlight on a not-so-pretty truth – do women need plastic surgery to stay competitive in the workplace?
It’s a rare thing to see Botox and feminism mentioned in the same sentence, yet a new US bill proposing a 5 percent tax on non-medical cosmetic surgery is sparking opposition from feminists worldwide.
Confused? Here is the gist of the argument:
The president of National Organisation for Women (NOW), Terry O’Neill, believes that putting a tax on cosmetic surgery procedure would be unfair for women who feel the pressure to look younger to get ahead in the workforce.
She argues that middle-age women are particularly susceptible to the tax – since those who have just lost their jobs in the financial crisis might be considering plastic surgery to look younger – as a way to impress potential employers. (Some are even calling this an “employment insurance” in tough times.)
“They have to find work,” O’Neill told the
New York Times. “And they are going for Botox or going for eye work, because the fact is we live in a society that punishes women for getting older.”
“Now they are going to put a tax on middle-aged women in a society that devalues them for being middle-aged?” she said.
The flip side of the ‘Bo-Tax’ debate is that by “rallying behind women who feel forced into cosmetic surgery, [we are] only reinforces the standards that drive them to that point,” said
Kate Harding of Salon.com. And it makes sense.
Whichever way you look at it – the ‘Bo-Tax’ is a subject that will continue to fuel some heated debates. Currently, Australia does not provide Medicare benefits to elective surgeries that are considered purely cosmetic. Those expenses are also not eligible for medical expenses tax offset.
Your say:
Are you for or against a ‘Bo-Tax’?