The Breast Enhancement Society of Great Britain should enjoy charitable status

First of all... hahaaaaaaaaaaa! :D---Ahem. To begin then. As a full-breasted, nay, over-endowed woman who is a proud national of Britain herself, I must sadly counter the proposal that the Breast Enhancement Society should be given charitable status.Let us begin with the unfortunate name of 'Breast Enhancement' society. My opponent sadly considers only the inflation and enlargement of the breasts as enhancement, rather than the perking up of older breasts (which in my view certainly counts as enhancement). This may of course be gender related - apparently, men are less concerned than women about the loss of perkiness (1) - but it unfortunately means that rather a lot of women that may apply for aid will be going, as Pro is concerned perhaps, the wrong way. Failure to assist these women will of course be an act of discrimination, and I am certain no charitable status can be awarded to an organisation proven to have a discriminatory basis. Let us not forget the poor girls who are asymmetrical - in short, to fulfil all the needs of breast improvement, that's going to have to be an awful lot of hands-on work. I mean to say, in this current economic climate, what charity could afford it?With reference to the above, let us not forget that women's breasts are ultimately getting bigger, not smaller (2). For this reason alone I urge all readers to vote Con, because clearly making breasts bigger is going to become less and less necessary over time and thus donating to such a cause would be wasteful. Indeed, Bravissimo states clearly that already, 60% or more of women have D cup or larger breasts in the UK already. As mentioned in the same article, having large assets is not always an, uh, asset. Speaking as a woman, first of all, I have noticed that men talk to your boobs, at least if you wear a low-cut top. This is confusing for women and must surely contribute to migraines and headaches for men worldwide through all that blood rushing to the head. For healthy and safety reasons and for the protection of impressionable young men (and older men, and well, all men), surely breast enlargement should not be supported. (They also throw things down your cleavage for a laugh, and surely no responsible adult can commend the throwing of dangerous projectiles. For the safety of the general public, vote CON.) Second of all, finding swimming costumes or dresses is a pain because your top and bottom halves don't match. If you are in favour of women being able to wear well-tailored, matching clothing I again urge you to support Con. Third, having big boobs is a ...pain. I mean, really. Even when you're safely tucked into your over-shoulder-boulder-holder (and they really are) that's an awful lot of weight. Which means back pain, and shoulder pain, and a lot of very unhappy women. Who wants unhappy, grumpy women? If not - vote Con!Oh, and did I forget - bigger breasts stop being perky quicker. VOTE CON!Last, but by no means least. This proposed charity appears to be guilty of gender discrimination. I insist that if it were to go ahead it would have to at the least be willing to support she-males in their breast development. To be truly worth supporting as a charity, however, at least in my opinion, it would need to be renamed 'the Enhancement Society' and would need to prove to be willing to assist men with body enhancements for aesthetic reasons as well. In short, support for male genital cosmetic surgery. It's like this. If women need to have breast implants, why not testicle implants? Penis extensions? Hair replacement therapies? Think of the poor benighted men who can't afford to have these operations done on a daily basis. Since this proposed charity is obviously full of man-haters, misandrists who won't support men's rights to look good for women, I whole-heartedly declare that you should vote CON and be done!(1) http://www.mynippon.com...(2) http://www.dailymail.co.uk...