Seven Oaks Magazine.

Television culture has certain rules. The most important rule being that only "beautiful" people sell products, and therefore only attractive people exist in the television world. This rule is especially strict with women. However, Fox's new reality television show, The Swan , shows that this rule can be bent, seeking out "ugly ducklings" to star. To get cast, you must not only believe that you are actually really ugly, but that you too can be beautiful and transformed into a "swan". Unfortunately, for the women on the show, this means extensive surgery, culminating in a bizarre beauty contest after months of recovery. The contestants end up bustier, blonder, emotionally frazzled and, often, looking a little drag queen esque . For the "ducklings" and the viewers subjected to it, The Swan is just foul.

Unlike Britney's new Toxic hit, I am not addicted to Fox's new toxic anti-women creation. The Swan is so tacky and over-the-top offensive that I am actually starting to question if reality television is really a good thing. Sarcasm aside, Fox has taken the degradation of humanity qualitatively further; Temptation Island is looking good.

Women, and stereotypes of us, have not fared well in reality television culture. We are clearly type cast: the bitch, the dimwit, the whore, and the gold-digger. Strong, confident women are usually belittled and vilified as the "bitch" like Trump's Omarosa. Successful women are presented as stupid and spoiled, like Jessica Simpson in Newlyweds . The classic "sleep her way to the top" scenario is in the forefront at every tribal council that Boston Rob's Amber avoids hearing "your tribe has spoken" on Survivor . Or, my personal favorite, young, successful single women presented as nothing more than self-obsessed gold-diggers that are preoccupied with "trapping" a man into marriage, literally any man that has money, even if he is unworthy, as seen on Joe Millionaire , Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire and The Bachelor . One thing that these reality television creations have in common is that in order to be a woman and participate you have to be conventionally beautiful: young, tall, thin, large breasted, middle-class and preferably white. So, women who do not live up to these often impossible and patriarchal standards of outer beauty are not welcomed on the small screen. That is unless, of course, they are willing to get a complete makeover.

Back in the day of "soft-core" makeovers shows like A Makeover Story , What not to Wear , or even a segment on Oprah , followed what today -- in the era of plastic surgeon- run makeover shows - seems like a harmless formula: Woman gets new hair, new clothes, make-up advice and then shocks her family with her change. Over the past year, this format has been taken to a shocking new level with both The Swan and Extreme Makeover , where women's families are not only shocked by their new appearances, but may have to request a DNA test in order to verify their identity.

The basic premise of the show is to take 17 women who are "average" looking and turn them into "beautiful" women who will then compete in a Fox-created beauty pageant. So, not only do these women get put through painful surgeries in order to correct what one T.V. surgeon calls "anatomically incorrect" facial features, but they are then placed in a side-show style "not beautiful enough for Miss America" reality television pageant, where all but one woman will be told again that they are still not beautiful enough.

The show is clearly an infomercial for the plastic surgery industry, which thrives in a country where 40 million people have no health insurance at all. The women and their eight-member teams of surgeons and Dr.Phil-like life strategists, discuss the contestants' physical flaws and then strategize about how tens of thousands of dollars of plastic surgery will help these women to become better people. This is a mantra that is repeated ad nauseam throughout the program and I think the most offensive part of the show for most of us. When did we (at least women) start equating bigger breasts or a brow lift with becoming a better person? I've never bought the cynical hype that feminism is dead; but on Fox, feminism is dead, buried, and long forgotten.

I understand that we are a society that is obsessed with beauty and not actually with becoming conscious, aware citizens. Tummy tucks, though, might not be the best route to liberation for the show's participants. For instance, one contestant, Rachel, probably would have been a happier woman if she had just left her husband, who was emotionally abusive. He often disparaged her "only average" looks, a sentiment reinforced by the plastic surgeons. Unfortunately for her, now that she is a "swan" her husband is still going to be an "ass". Another contestant, Kelly, was shown constantly in tears. Although the show's producers tried to construct her as an overly-emotional woman, it was clear that she was severally depressed and that the numerous surgeries only seemed to make her worse. Her new DD's could not enlarge her self-esteem.

Behind the glitz and glamour of television infomercial makeovers, there is the sad truth that there has been a radical increase in plastic surgeries since the debut of extreme makeover shows. And women are, in fact, willing to risk their lives in order to live up to the Beauty Myth, as prominent Montreal businesswoman Micheline Charest died this week due to complications from plastic surgery. Wait lists for essential surgeries grow, while so many skilled professionals perform essentially vain surgeries. Let us turn off The Swan , and keep beauty out of the (be)holder of the scalpel.