Philosophy Question: Letting the Biggots Win
Mary-Anne G. Wolf
should we allow them to have it if they want to? Does this depend on the
level of risk for the treatment? Should we respect the choice of someone
who does it? Should we encourage it if it makes people's lives better?
What if there were advantages beyond overcoming the prejudice?
If Gay people could receive some treatment which makes them Straight,
same questions.
If Jewish people chose to convert to Christianity as a solution to
antisemitism, not because anyone forced them, but because they said
they wanted to, same questions.
If people with big noses want to have surgery to make their noses
smaller, same questions.
If women with breasts that are too small or big in their opinions
want to have surgery to change the size of their breasts, same
questions.
If children with an imbalance which prevents them from growing want to
receive treatment to make them grow normally, and their parents agree,
same questions. What if the children start with normal growth and
want to play sports where the extra growth would help them play
better?
I would hope we all agree that an adult should be allowed to have holes
made in their ears if they want to. I think we mostly agree that
having weight loss surgery which is very very dangerous is something
we would at least try to talk someone out of.
Where things get fuzzy is to what extent someone has the right to do
something of which others disapprove in order to look "better" or be
"more normal" at least in their own opinion.
Where things also get fuzzy is that "lap band" surgery is supposed to
be safer than bypass. That does not mean perfectly safe. Nothing is.
It means less bad. And it does not deal with sizeism.
Where things also get fuzzy is the extent to which spouses have the
obligation to please one another.
While I realize that there is a discussion between a specific husband
and wife about what the wife intends to do to herself, there is a
broader question as to how much one should respond to prejudice by
letting the biggots win, and how this interacts with owning one's
own body and thus having the right to decide what is done to that
body.
In order to get away from the emotion I am sure many of us feel about
weight, it might be useful to consider other categories of people
who might consider their category to put them at a disadvantage.
Mary-Anne
@--------------------
Irfon-Kim Ahmad
> If Black people could receive some treatment which makes them look
> White, should we allow them to have it if they want to?
>
(See also: The plot of X-Men 3, what plot there was.)
I have no really good reactions to any of the questions -- i.e. nothing
that I think sheds new light on the issue. However, I don't think it's
a simple issue with a simple answer that depends on the consideration of
a single variable (such as, "How harmful is the procedure?"). I think
it may be a balance of several variables, some of which need to be how
your action affects others. Ultimately, though, I think that many of
these things should be left up to the individual to choose.
Mike Tyo
news:eat8j1$cfp$1...@pcls4.std.com...
> I think we mostly agree that having weight loss surgery which is very very
> dangerous is something
> we would at least try to talk someone out of.
Couldn't agree more.
> Where things get fuzzy is to what extent someone has the right to do
> something of which others disapprove in order to look "better" or be
> "more normal" at least in their own opinion.
This is exactly where I'm at with this thing.
> Where things also get fuzzy is the extent to which spouses have the
> obligation to please one another.
As I've said a couple times or so, this size issue really didn't exist
when we got married, but now it's become an obsession based on half-truths
and BS - and that's where the roads part and go in different directions.
She's already had her pre-op done, so this coming Monday morning she'll be
under the knife.. That battle has unfortunately been lost.
Here's another thing that I just don't understand. She's going to be
staying at her sister's place while she hopefully recovers. Prior to the
surgery, she'll be leaving Saturday evening to get there because they want
to take her out to dinner before this happens. Mind you, she has to take
some heavy-duty meds to clean her out the day before the surgery. I simply
do not understand all this nonsense her family's doing when they've been
some of the principle badgers in this ordeal.
> In order to get away from the emotion I am sure many of us feel about
> weight, it might be useful to consider other categories of people
> who might consider their category to put them at a disadvantage.
Unfortunately I'm unable to do that. I'd love to be able to turn off
the switch and regain my sight, but that would take advances in medical
science or a plain miracle to accomplish. Be that as it may, the bottom
line is that it's really sad that this has to happen to people for the
reasons it does.
Mike
Robin King
news:wcvAg.25923$1Z5....@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
| She's already had her pre-op done, so this coming Monday morning
she'll
| be under the knife.. That battle has unfortunately been lost.
Sorry to hear that. Hugs to you Mike, and I
hope things turn out well for you both.
Robin
Mike Tyo
news:6WyAg.544235$Fs1.2...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Sorry to hear that. Hugs to you Mike, and I
> hope things turn out well for you both.
Thanks so much - I really appreciate that.
As of right now, the roads will be going in different directions; and
this is not just because of my disagreement with the surgery. She wants a
big change for herself, and that's cool. Our lives will not be compatible
as a result of that, so rather than be at each others throats, it just makes
more sense to go our separate ways. The only thing I can say is that perhaps
the surgery is a catalyst to bring about what's really coming down the pike.
Another thing sparking the breakup is that there are serious issues with her
daughter not wanting to respect authority, including her own mother's, and
that, coupled with related things has caused discourse in the family. My
own children have a rough time of it as it is, and they don't need this
stuff on top of it. My guess is right now that by the end of September life
will be very different here.
Quite frankly, this is a good thing, because I need to reestablish my own
situation as it was prior to this marriage; and if I get into another
relationship, I don't want to be going through this kind of ordeal again.
Mike
Mark Kramer
Mary-Anne G. Wolf <m...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
>If Black people could receive some treatment which makes them look White,
>should we allow them to have it if they want to?
Of course.
>Does this depend on the level of risk for the treatment?
Of course not.
>Should we respect the choice of someone who does it?
Irrelevant. Unless you are legally in charge of them, you have no say.
Can you think they are stupid for doing it? Sure. Would you be supportive
of that person if you came to a public forum and vented about their poor
decisions and what a grevious mistake they are making?
>Should we encourage it if it makes people's lives better?
Of course.
>What if there were advantages beyond overcoming the prejudice?
Do you recognize that the question is, itself, prejudical? It assumes
that being white is in all cases better than being black just because.
"What if there were OTHER advatages, too, huh?"
>If Gay people could receive some treatment which makes them Straight,
>same questions.
Same answers.
>If Jewish people chose to convert to Christianity as a solution to
>antisemitism, not because anyone forced them, but because they said
>they wanted to, same questions.
Same answers.
>If people with big noses want to have surgery to make their noses
>smaller, same questions.
Same answers.
>If women with breasts that are too small or big in their opinions
>want to have surgery to change the size of their breasts, same
>questions.
Same answers.
>If children with an imbalance which prevents them from growing want to
>receive treatment to make them grow normally, and their parents agree,
>same questions.
Same answers.
>What if the children start with normal growth and
>want to play sports where the extra growth would help them play
>better?
Same answers. And if that modification then made them ineligible to play
that sport, I'd say "you made the choice."
>I would hope we all agree that an adult should be allowed to have holes
>made in their ears if they want to. I think we mostly agree that
>having weight loss surgery which is very very dangerous is something
>we would at least try to talk someone out of.
I agree that an adult has the right to make adult choices, and unless
I am a legal guardian or otherwise legally responsible for the choices,
I have no right to tell someone they cannot do something that affects
only themselves. Nor do you.
>Where things get fuzzy is to what extent someone has the right to do
>something of which others disapprove in order to look "better" or be
>"more normal" at least in their own opinion.
There is no fuzzy here. If you want to cut your nose off and have it
attached to your naval because you think you'll look better that way,
feel free. My dissapproval is irrelevant to anything -- unless YOU
want to make it relevant. If I told you I dissapproved and you did it
anyway, well, too bad for me. If I told you I dissapproved and you cried
because I did, well, I love you too and I think you are wrong to do it,
but I'll still love you even if eskimo kisses involve a new level of
intimacy. Maybe even because they do. But that all depended on you making
my feelings relevant. If you don't care, and all you want to do is be
able to sneeze without moving the napkin from your lap at the restaurant,
that's your choice.
>While I realize that there is a discussion between a specific husband
>and wife about what the wife intends to do to herself,
I don't believe there is a discussion. I believe there is a presentation
of opinion. I believe there has been a decision. I believe there is a
"war" that we have no hope of preventing or fixing. I believe that we could
be supportive of the vocal participant, but I also believe that there is
another person involved who needs support more than he. It sounds to me
like she is having a much tougher time than he is.
>there is a
>broader question as to how much one should respond to prejudice by
>letting the biggots win,
How you respond to prejudice is up to you. How you want other people to
respond to alleged prejudice is not your decision. Assigning motives
to why someone would have their nose attached to their belly button is
not your right.
Bringing this back to the top, I have no idea why M. Jackson mutilated
himself the way he did. I cannot imagine any "prejudice" that he
was trying to overcome. The fact that 83 people on the planet might
have moved seats if he sat next to them is so far removed from the
hundreds of thousands who clammored for him that it is just not a
sane consideration. If he had asked me, I'd have told him he was nuts.
He didn't, and thus I have no right to say he cannot do what he did.
And by doing so, I'm now probably one of the people who would change
seats -- I have no desire to sit next to a nut, no matter what color
he is.
>In order to get away from the emotion I am sure many of us feel about
>weight, it might be useful to consider other categories of people
>who might consider their category to put them at a disadvantage.
It might also be useful to consider just what "support" is and how one
"supports" another.
Siobhan Perricone
>She's already had her pre-op done, so this coming Monday morning she'll be
>under the knife.. That battle has unfortunately been lost.
>
> Here's another thing that I just don't understand. She's going to be
>staying at her sister's place while she hopefully recovers. Prior to the
You're not going with her?
--
Siobhan Perricone
One trend that bothers me is the glorification of
stupidity, that the media is reassuring people it's
all right not to know anything.... That to me is
far more dangerous than a little pornography
on the Internet. - Carl Sagan
Mike Tyo
news:iq39d2pd6hi63p93t...@4ax.com...
> You're not going with her?
I have responsibilities with my own two children here, so I'm just not
going to be able to be there. Since I don't drive, I don't have the luxury
of being able to call anybody at will for a 60 mile plus ride. She knows
and understands all this; but there is the telephone, so it's not like
everything's cut off.
Mike
Death to Plants
>On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:58:36 GMT, "Mike Tyo" <zx2...@eaglewing.wns> wrote:
>>She's already had her pre-op done, so this coming Monday morning she'll be
>>under the knife.. That battle has unfortunately been lost.
>> Here's another thing that I just don't understand. She's going to be
>>staying at her sister's place while she hopefully recovers. Prior to the
>You're not going with her?
They're separating, if I understand Mike's latest post correctly.
I'm sorry things didn't work out, Mike.
--
Piglet
Mary-Anne G. Wolf
Mark Kramer <c28...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
>Do you recognize that the question is, itself, prejudical? It assumes
>that being white is in all cases better than being black just because.
>"What if there were OTHER advatages, too, huh?"
Not at all. If the transformation turned White people into Black
people then this might well have the side effect of preventing
sunburn.
However, given the direction in which prejudice goes more often, if
one's primary concern is the opinions of biggots ("better job"), one
is more likely to want to turn from Black to White and not the other
way around.
The distinction I was trying to make in choosing the direction of
transformation was
between changing oneself because the new condition was, no matter how
anyone else might react, "better" than the old condition, being able
to walk up stairs vs not being able to, for example,
and changings oneself primarily because of other people's reactions.
Your points about defining "support" and declaring that what one is
supposed to do depends on the relationship, are good points.
Most of us have experienced having total strangers tell us we
ought to lose weight, and most of us felt that was wrong to do.
It turns out that the nature of the relationship between Mike and his
wife was not as strong as he apparently had assumed early on, or maybe
changed as a result of the discussion.
There are stories of Jewish famlies in which part of the family
converted to another religion to deal with antisemitism, and the
converted family ended up cutting off communication with those who
chose to stay Jewish for the same reason.
In the other direction, there are people who argue that we should
redirect the money now spent on making locations accessible, and
instead spend it on "curing" the disabilities. Personally, I think
they over-estimate how much disability one can fix, even given
unlimited money.
Then there is a similar issue about deaf culture and cochlear implants.
The fat-acceptance movement seems to take the attitude that "We're
here. We're fat. Get used to it." There are intermediate points
between complete fat-acceptance and complete sizeism, and disagreement
on how one ought to react to biggotry may split people up just as much
as the biggotry itself.
Mary-Anne
@--------------------
Mike Tyo
news:eb57ra$eri$1...@reader2.panix.com...
> I'm sorry things didn't work out, Mike.
Me too, but with everything else going on, I think it's for the best for
everybody. I'd love to have things work out, but we've been at this for
quite some time now.
Thanks for your kind words.
Mike
Siobhan Perricone
Yah I saw later that you guys are separating. I'm sorry to hear that. I
hope things work out for the best for you both.
Mike Tyo
> Yah I saw later that you guys are separating. I'm sorry to hear that. I
> hope things work out for the best for you both.
Thanks, Siobhan. I know I'm gonna get a lot of flack from it, but there
have been other issues working their way into the relationship that aren't
helping. As I said before, the surgery is a catalyst that's fostering
everything else. I think it's for the good of everybody involved. Perhaps
down the line I can do this again - I don't know. I just don't want to get
into a relationship where things aren't what they seem, if ya know what I
mean.
Mike
Siobhan Perricone
>"Siobhan Perricone" <morg...@foobox.com> wrote in message
>news:lp4md211jdkagfnpk...@4ax.com...
>> Yah I saw later that you guys are separating. I'm sorry to hear that. I
>> hope things work out for the best for you both.
>
> Thanks, Siobhan. I know I'm gonna get a lot of flack from it, but there
>have been other issues working their way into the relationship that aren't
>helping.
I remember that you've been struggling with this relationship for a long
time. Of course there are always two sides to every story, but it really
sounds like you to are going down diverging paths.
>As I said before, the surgery is a catalyst that's fostering
>everything else. I think it's for the good of everybody involved. Perhaps
>down the line I can do this again - I don't know. I just don't want to get
>into a relationship where things aren't what they seem, if ya know what I
>mean.
Yeah, well, might not have been not as it seemed, things change, too. :)
But still, good luck, hon.
Mike Tyo
> I remember that you've been struggling with this relationship for a long
> time. Of course there are always two sides to every story, but it really
> sounds like you to are going down diverging paths.
Yup, it's been ongoing for about three years, give or take; and you're
indeed correct - we are going down diverging paths. You're also right in
that there are two sides to every story; and depending on which side of the
fence you are, you'll take the side that's appropriate to your viewpoint -
and that's okay. where it's not okay is when we get into flame wars about
personal situations, and that's where I get worked up. That sort of thing
isn't necessary, especially when there are support groups such as this where
some commonality on certain situations is achieved.
I had the pleasure of having dinner with two very dear friends this evening,
and they both agreed that it is a person's right to have his or her life in
whatever way is most comfortable. They saw the changes coming down over the
last three years as well - and some other friends, who happen to be
colleagues, saw the same things too. So in some respects I feel a bit
better in that I'm not the only one seeing the sorts of things that are
causing us to diverge.
Yeah, well, might not have been not as it seemed, things change, too. :)
But still, good luck, hon.
Thanks a bunch for your kind words; they're very much appreciated.
Mike
Stef
Mike Tyo <mt...@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>I had the pleasure of having dinner with two very dear friends this evening,
>and they both agreed that it is a person's right to have his or her life in
>whatever way is most comfortable. They saw the changes coming down over the
>last three years as well - and some other friends, who happen to be
>colleagues, saw the same things too. So in some respects I feel a bit
>better in that I'm not the only one seeing the sorts of things that are
>causing us to diverge.
I'm glad you have friends who can give you this kind of feedback.
I hope for the best for everyone concerned.
--
Stef ** st...@cat-and-dragon.com <*> http://www.cat-and-dragon.com/stef
**
READ THIS BEFORE OPENING PACKAGE: According to Certain Suggested
Versions of the Grand Unified Theory, the Primary Particles Constituting
this Product May Decay to Nothingness Within the Next Four Hundred
Million Years. -- Susan Hewitt and Edward Subitzky, "A Call for More
Scientific Truth in Product Warning Labels"
Mike Tyo
news:ebuljq$qb$1...@reader2.panix.com...
> I'm glad you have friends who can give you this kind of feedback.
> I hope for the best for everyone concerned.
Thanks, Stef. It's indeed nice to have friends - moreover, friends who
see things the way they are and not try to manipulate them into something
they're not. I've had too much experience in dealing with just those sorts
of things, and it's not a pleasant thing for anybody as it polarizes people;
next thing ya know, the friends you thought you had are no longer friends.
So I'm very thankful for the friends I have.
As to what happens next, who knows. I really want to have a
relationship, but I can't go through things the way this last one went down.
Mike
Mary-Anne G. Wolf
Cecily <cecily...@bloglines.com> wrote:
>On 2006-08-03 09:34:41 -0700, m...@TheWorld.com (Mary-Anne G. Wolf) said:
>
>> Where things get fuzzy is to what extent someone has the right to do
>> something of which others disapprove in order to look "better" or be
>> "more normal" at least in their own opinion.
>
>Are you holding my purse strings?
>Otherwise, I think we could all
>benefit from repeating the mantra "Nobody asked me."
>
You are absolutely entitled to your opinion.
Mine is that there are arguments in both directions
and that the boundry is fuzzy.
Let's consider some specific examples.
Let's consider if the person having the surgery is your spouse,
and if there are children who depend on both parents
and if the weight loss surgery is of a kind which can be fatal
(not the recent lap band but something higher risk).
Let's consider if the person making the judgement is an employer
who honestly believes that being fat makes health insurance
cost more, and the fat employee does NOT want to have the surgery.
The person judging does indeed hold purse strings, to a degree.
Let's consider if the person who has the weight loss surgery
is not killed, but is made sick enough that they require
government assistance that taxpayers must pay for, so in some
sense everyone is holding their purse strings, to a degree.
Breast augmentation or a nose job is easier, because it may
not look the way you want, but it is unlikely to damage you much.
Body-mod is not quite stand-alone. Your decisions can impact other
people, and because they can, the other people can legitimately have
opinions about them, but how much and when it is acceptable to express
the opinions, or expect you to listen to them, is fuzzy IMHO.
Mary-Anne
@--------------------
Mark Kramer
Mary-Anne G. Wolf <m...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
>Cecily <cecily...@bloglines.com> wrote:
>>On 2006-08-03 09:34:41 -0700, m...@TheWorld.com (Mary-Anne G. Wolf) said:
>>> Where things get fuzzy is to what extent someone has the right to do
>>> something of which others disapprove in order to look "better" or be
>>> "more normal" at least in their own opinion.
>>How is this "fuzzy"?
>>Are you holding my purse strings?
>>Otherwise, I think we could all
>>benefit from repeating the mantra "Nobody asked me."
>>
>You are absolutely entitled to your opinion.
>Mine is that there are arguments in both directions
>and that the boundry is fuzzy.
>Let's consider some specific examples.
>
>Let's consider if the person having the surgery is your spouse,
>and if there are children who depend on both parents
>and if the weight loss surgery is of a kind which can be fatal
>(not the recent lap band but something higher risk).
Did the spouse give up his rights when he got married, or just when the
children got born? What if the surgery has no risks, it's just that the
spouse doesn't like the reasons it is being done? Does the surgery-ee
get their rights back if the complaining spouse is doing so for purely
selfish reasons?
>Let's consider if the person making the judgement is an employer
That is not someone making a decision for themselves that others object
to. That's not a specific example.
>Let's consider if the person who has the weight loss surgery
>is not killed, but is made sick enough that they require
>government assistance that taxpayers must pay for, so in some
>sense everyone is holding their purse strings, to a degree.
If we takes the rights to do dangerous things away from everyone, we'd
have empty highways and nobody in the airplanes. People have died
from eating in restaurants and in their own homes, so there'd be a lot of
really hungry people. People fall in the shower and die or get permanently
injured. Dirty, hungry people who cannot go anywhere. Who cannot own guns
or knives or scissors or razors or pinking shears.
>Body-mod is not quite stand-alone. Your decisions can impact other
>people,
Every decision can impact other people. Do you give up the right to decide
what you are going to eat today because your decision might impact the
grocery store?
>and because they can, the other people can legitimately have
>opinions about them,
You were not talking about the rights of other people to have opinions.
You were talking about the right of the person to DO something contrary to
those opinions. That is not fuzzy. What extent someone has the right to
do something just because someone else disapproves...
>>On 2006-08-03 09:34:41 -0700, m...@TheWorld.com (Mary-Anne G. Wolf) said:
>>> Where things get fuzzy is to what extent someone has the right to do
>>> something of which others disapprove in order to look "better" or be
>>> "more normal" at least in their own opinion.
Not fuzzy at all.