Was just thinking about this as I have fuzzy fine hair (neither holds a curl nor grows straight) that looks great it I run a hot brush through it. And then remembered this feeling of how 'going with natural' is always 'better'.
BUT SOMETIMES NATURAL IS HARDER WORK!!! 
Even if the hot brush only takes a grand total of 5 minutes. Hardly eating up my time..
But then I thought, Why is natural seen as better?
As humans we modify things all the time, throughout history - from ancient Egyptian hair/make up to putting wallpaper over bare plaster. It isn't just a beauty thing, it's simply just very human to modify or alter things, to enhance them (depending on your viewpoint of course) or make them easier. And sometimes we like making things more challenging.
When it comes to fighting against prejudice, then 'natural' makes complete sense, such as skin tone, perceptions of curls being untidy, being large or small. Some things (wrongly) carry negative cultural connotations and it's necessary to fight back and claim authenticity.
But in general, why do we often feel pressure to not alter things? If I truly prefer my hair tousled with a heated brush, is that an insult to my natural fuzz texture? Am I suffering low self esteem because I wear a light brown mascara to enhance my blonde lashes? Is it always negative to fight grey hairs? Perhaps it is the reasons why we do things that matter, and that it is essential to have awareness of why we do what we do (cosmetic surgery, more risky alterations).
It's interesting to ponder which is personal and which cultural, as we learn so many associations growing up that it's difficult to separate the two, I think. Similarly to how some people unashamedly insult tattoos/piercings due to cultural perceptions and associations. I have been on US centric forums where the users will openly declare that a tattoo wearer is 'trash', uurgh. - so essentially we tie a person's image with a behaviour or 'type' which is often wrong.
Thoughts? Or is this too waffly, lol?