Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Seasons of Grace

Home
Catholic
The Unfortunate Chronology of Melissa Gilbert’s Breasts: Size Doesn’t Matter

The Unfortunate Chronology of Melissa Gilbert’s Breasts: Size Doesn’t Matter

Last updated on: January 29, 2015 at 7:44 pm by Kathy Schiffer

The Unfortunate Chronology of Melissa Gilbert’s Breasts: Size Doesn’t Matter 2015-01-29T19:44:08-05:00 Kathy Schiffer

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

By NBC Television Network (eBay item photo front photo back) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

So Half-Pint had a boob job. And then she didn’t.

Melissa Gilbert is best known for her role as Laura, the bonneted daughter of a devout farmer (played by Michael Landon) in the popular TV series based on Laura Ingalls Wilder’s “Little House on the Prairie.”

Gilbert appeared today on Good Morning America to talk her recent surgery to have her breast implants surgically removed.

* * * * *

The chronology of the star’s notable breasts goes something like this:

Gilbert was, by her own admission, a “late bloomer.” Even as her co-star Alison Arngrim, who played Nellie Oleson on the show, was developing curves, Melissa Gilbert was not; and Melissa was embarrassed to be flat as a rail while Alison graduated to fill out her bikini.
In 1981, at the age of 16, Gilbert was playing an adult version of her character; and she was encouraged to wear a padded bra–bringing the perky star’s breast size from A to B.
In 1989, at age 24, Gilbert became pregnant with her first son, Dakota. Her breasts grew and grew until, she reveals on her blog, they reached their maximum C-cup size. She nursed Dakota for nearly a year, and described her joy at being able to meet her infant’s needs: “Breast feeding,” she wrote, “created a perfect circle of love, nurturing, bonding and connection with another human being.”
But after the star-mom stopped nursing, her breasts went back to their natural size but not, she confesses, their regular position. They were “lower…much, much lower.” Gilbert’s then-husband once described her breasts as “socks full of marbles with knots at the top.” Shamed, Gilbert began wearing a bra around the clock, even when she slept or made love.
Three years later, Gilbert and her husband divorced; and Gilbert began to worry about engaging in sexual relations with another man. Fearing how someone would look at her, she resolved to have breast implants.
In about 1994, Gilbert had her first breast implants. The first implants were saline; later, she would have them removed and replaced by new silicone implants. She wrote about that first surgery: “The surgery went perfectly. I was sore for a while but nothing too awful and my boobs looked really natural. Most importantly,…and most pathetically really…my self-esteem went back up.
When Gilbert’s second son Michael was born, she again decided to breastfeed. With her already augmented breasts, she grew again–this time until her breasts were a size 34-EE.
In 2004, Melissa read that breast implants should be replaced every ten to fifteen years. Her own implants were already 12 years old; so she underwent another breast surgery, this time using silicone implants and adding a breast uplift.
But she worried. She worried about the risk of silicone leaking into her body. She worried that she would have to have periodic replacements throughout her life, and imagined having breast implants at age 80. Finally, she decided to return to her normal state.
On January 6, Gilbert had the implants surgically removed, downsizing from a DD cup size to a modest B. “Just an average B,” she said, “not a big B.”

I WISH I COULD TELL YOU that Melissa Gilbert learned from her experience, and that she now eschews the choice to alter one’s body in the quest for a positive image. Not so.

She does offer some good reflections on her blog.

The shallowness of my existence at that point brought me to my knees. I had to change. I had to look inward and address my issues (this looking inward is a constant process by the way)…. It was time for me to change. I had to focus on what was real and true. I’d lost myself somehow.

And this:

Aging is a gift not a curse.
Love yourself.
You are perfectly beautiful.
You are enough.

She acknowledges the positive health effects of removing the implants. “Not only do I feel healthier and better,” she says,

“…but I don’t have these inappropriately large breasts that were wrong for my body, kind of getting the way. I sleep more comfortably. And the bonus is I have disc issues in my neck. And I have absolutely no pulling on my shoulders. And all the pain in my neck has completely disappeared since the surgery.”

She warns women who may be considering implants that they’ll have to have repeat surgeries every 10 or 15 years, throughout their lives.

BUT WHAT I WANT TO HEAR–and what’s still missing from her continuing testimony–is this:

God made you perfect. You, his most precious creation, are beautiful just as you are.

If anyone–a spouse, a partner, the ogling public–thinks that you need to undergo a surgical procedure in order to be acceptable in society, you should flee.

It’s what’s inside that counts.

God doesn’t make mistakes.

Catholic Answers summarizes the view of moral theologians regarding plastic surgery, as follows:

Plastic surgery would seem to be warranted if it would provide a significant therapeutic benefit in some regard, either physical (e.g., reconstructive surgery to restore function or utility in cases of accident or birth defect) or psychological. This is provided that the procedure does not damage some other equal or greater good and provided that it is not intrinsically immoral.

Plastic surgery would seem to be permitted—even without significant therapeutic effect—provided that it did not damage a significant good and provided that the procedure is not intrinsically immoral.

Plastic surgery would seem to be impermissible if it damaged a good greater than that to be achieved, being venial if the difference in the goods were light and potentially mortal if the difference in the goods were grave.

Hollywood

Medical Ethics

Breast Implants

Little House on the Prairie

Melissa Gilbert

Plastic Surgery

Previous Post

January 29, 2015

The Lord's Jester and the Pig's Feet: The Story of Brother Juniper

Next Post

January 29, 2015 EWTN Gets Its Day in Court

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category #Synod14 Abortion Abstinence Abuse Addiction Adoption Advent Adventure Advertising Aging Agnosticism All Saints Day All Souls Day Amish Anathema Angels Anglican Animals Annulment Annunciation Apocalypse Apologetics Apostles Apostleship of the Sea Apparitions Archangels Archbishop Cordileone Archbishop Dolan Archbishop Vigneron Archeology Architecture Art Art Buchwald Ash Wednesday Assisted Suicide Astronauts Atheism Athletes Babies Baptism Beatification Beauty Bible Biochemistry Bioethics Birds Bishop Lori Bishops Blasphemy Books Canon Law Canonization Capital Punishment Cardinal Burke Cardinal Dolan Cardinal George Caritas Catechesis Catechism of the Catholic Church Catholic Catholic Education Catholic Higher Education Catholic Social Teaching Celibacy Cemeteries Character Charity Chastity Cheapskate Christian Unity Christmas Churches Civil Rights Cloning Comedy Communion of Saints Community Kitchens Confession Confirmation Conscience Consequences Consistory Constitution Contraception Conversion Cooking Councils of the Church Creativity Criminal Justice Cristero War Crucifixion Crystal Cathedral Culture Death Death and Dying Death Penalty Department of Health and Human Services Diaconate Dictatorship of Relativism Dignity Disability Discrimination Dissidence Divorce Doctors of the Church Early Church Fathers Easter Economics Ecumenism Education Encyclicals Environmentalism Episcopal Church Eucharist Euthanasia Evangelism Evangelists Evangelization Evolution Excuses Facebook Faith Families Family Fashion Fasting Fatherhood Federal Government Feminism Fiction Film First Amendment First Communion For Greater Glory Forgiveness Free Speech Friends Friendship Gender Discrimination Germany Gnosticism Good Friday Government Grace Greed Gregorian Calendar Happiness Health Heaven Heresy History Holidays Holiness Hollywood Holy Land Holy Saturday Holy Spirit Holy Week Holy Year Home Sweet Home Homosexuality Hope Humanism Humility Humor Imagination Immaculate Conception Immigration Impulsivity In Vitro Fertilization Incarnation Indulgences Infallibility Internet Islam Italy Jerusalem Jesus Judaism Justice Kathleen Sebelius Labor Movement LCWR Lent Life Literature Liturgy Lourdes Love Magi Marketing Marriage Martyrdom Martyrs Mary Mass Media Medical Ethics Mexico Michigan Miracles Missionaries Modernism Modesty Monks Monothelitism Motherhood Movies Mushrooms Music Muslim Mystery Mysticism Mythology Nativity Natural Law Nature New Evangelization New Media New Year New Year's Resolutions Nostalgia Obscenity Occult Old Testament Origen Orthodox Orvieto Pallium Papacy Parenting Patience Patriarch Bartholomew Patriotism Peace Peace and Justice Penitence Pentecost People Persecution Philosophy Poetry Political activism Political Correctness Politics Polls Pop Culture Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope John XXIII Pope Paul VI Pope St. Pius X Pope Urban VII Population Prayer Preaching Prejudice Pride Priesthood Pro-Life Protestantism Psychology Purgatory Queenship of Mary Racism Rape Real Presence Reconciliation Reformation Relics Religious Religious Liberty Reliquary Renewal Reproductive Technology Resurrection Rights Romance Rome Royalty Sacraments Sacred Heart Saints Satanism Science Science Fiction Scripture Seal of Confession Secularism Seniors September 11 Seventy Times Seven Sexuality Sharks Sin Smoking Social Communications Social Justice Social Networking Social Sciences Space Exploration Spirituality Sports St. Luke St. Patrick's Day St. Paul St. Peter St. Teresa of Avila Stations of the Cross Steve Jobs Superstition Supreme Court Symbolism Synod Technology Teen Rebellion Television Terrorism Thankfulness Thanksgiving Theology Think This, Not That Tobit Toilets Toys Tradition Traditions Transplants Travel Trinity Twitter U.S. Air Force Uncategorized United Nations USCCB Valentine Vatican Vatican Archives Vatican Blogfest Virtue Vocations Where We Pray White Heart Women World Day of Social Communications World Meeting of Families World News World Youth Day Worship Writing Year of Consecrated Life Year of Faith Year of Mercy Youth

Select a Month December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the first woman mentioned in the Bible after Eve?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Sarah Rachel Leah Rebekah