The limits of choice

[Preussverige]

This thread has come far in concluding we need to ban ketchup.

[The Wolven League]

I have to say that as a woman, who has probably been around a great deal longer than most of you kidlets, I've seen more pressure, criticism, snobbery, degradation, and all other manner of bullshit from other women in my life. Not so much the men.

I have had the same experience.

Some men do have unrealistic expectations, or will make idiotic comments like responding to anti-fat-shaming propaganda by ranting about the health consequences of extreme morbid obesity, which completely misses the point. But the nastiest personal attacks and the most persistent pushing of unreasonable beauty standards has been from other women who seem like they want to turn it into a competition to see who can do the most weird shit to their body and get the closest to some unattainable "ideal" -- and the "ideal" has very little to do with what men are attracted to.

I thought you were a ship?

[The Empire of Pretantia]

So this is a health thing? Then do we ban smoking, drugs, processed foods, cars, and all the other things that are detrimental to our health? After all, those are all part of our cultural norms.

SMOKING: awareness campaigns and even limited bans and even rasing taxes in order to discourage consumption - ALREADY ENFORCED.
DRUGS: already severely limited and mostly outlaed.
UNHEALTHY FOODS: awareness campaigns already performing, proposals about taxations and so on.
CARS: the most harmful (polluting) models are already banned from some zones of the cities, some other zones are totally "car-free", various areas for electric / zero-emission cars only, promotions and government funding for hybrid and zero-emission cars.

Then

Why it should be different for breast implants?

So you're saying we shouldn't ban breast implants.

[MERIZoC]

So this is a health thing? Then do we ban smoking, drugs, processed foods, cars, and all the other things that are detrimental to our health? After all, those are all part of our cultural norms.

SMOKING: awareness campaigns and even limited bans and even rasing taxes in order to discourage consumption - ALREADY ENFORCED.
DRUGS: already severely limited and mostly outlaed.
UNHEALTHY FOODS: awareness campaigns already performing, proposals about taxations and so on.
CARS: the most harmful (polluting) models are already banned from some zones of the cities, some other zones are totally "car-free", various areas for electric / zero-emission cars only, promotions and government funding for hybrid and zero-emission cars.

Then

Why it should be different for breast implants?

I'll address your car one specifically by point in out that car-free zones are very uncommon. As for the rest of it, only drugs see bans, and not everywhere. Awareness campaigns are not bans.

[USS Monitor]

I have had the same experience.

Some men do have unrealistic expectations, or will make idiotic comments like responding to anti-fat-shaming propaganda by ranting about the health consequences of extreme morbid obesity, which completely misses the point. But the nastiest personal attacks and the most persistent pushing of unreasonable beauty standards has been from other women who seem like they want to turn it into a competition to see who can do the most weird shit to their body and get the closest to some unattainable "ideal" -- and the "ideal" has very little to do with what men are attracted to.

I thought you were a ship?

Do you think ships don't have to deal with body-shaming? I got teased a lot about my appearance when I was young.

[Eol Sha]

I have had the same experience.

Some men do have unrealistic expectations, or will make idiotic comments like responding to anti-fat-shaming propaganda by ranting about the health consequences of extreme morbid obesity, which completely misses the point. But the nastiest personal attacks and the most persistent pushing of unreasonable beauty standards has been from other women who seem like they want to turn it into a competition to see who can do the most weird shit to their body and get the closest to some unattainable "ideal" -- and the "ideal" has very little to do with what men are attracted to.

I thought you were a ship?

Ships are typically referred to as "she" by most sailors.

[Celseon]

Long hair and skirts do not hurt health.
Some women are capable of breaking out of cultural pressure.
Some other women aren't capable of breaking out of cultural pressure.
I think that as long as cultural pressure doesn't enforce unhealthy "choices" then there aren't problems, but there ARE problems when the "choices" enforced by cultural pressure are harmful, unhealthy.
We must keep care of all women, helping them to overcome such cultural pressure.
I'm NOT sure about a "ban", I'm NOT sure it would work well, maybe it wouldn't.
But I'm absolutely sure a massive awareness campaign about such matter can do just only good.

You just don't get it, do you? Women are making choices, and you're reducing the women making those decisions to incompetents blown about on the breeze by cultural forces which must be led to the "correct" path by their radical feminist superiors. The core premise of your entire argument is that when women choose "wrongly" (according to you) they haven't really made a choice at all.

[Chessmistress]

SMOKING: awareness campaigns and even limited bans and even rasing taxes in order to discourage consumption - ALREADY ENFORCED.
DRUGS: already severely limited and mostly outlaed.
UNHEALTHY FOODS: awareness campaigns already performing, proposals about taxations and so on.
CARS: the most harmful (polluting) models are already banned from some zones of the cities, some other zones are totally "car-free", various areas for electric / zero-emission cars only, promotions and government funding for hybrid and zero-emission cars.

Then

Why it should be different for breast implants?

So you're saying we shouldn't ban breast implants.

No.
Clare Chambers proposed to ban breast implants.
My idea is softer: I recognize she's right but I think about a massive awareness campaign and maybe even a special taxation on breast implants and the like: breasts implants it's an "issue" mostly pertaining richer women, so it shouldn't be a problem for them paying something like 20% or 25% more in order to please males.

[Fartsniffage]

So you're saying we shouldn't ban breast implants.

No.
Clare Chambers proposed to ban breast implants.
My idea is softer: I recognize she's right but I think about a massive awareness campaign and maybe even a special taxation on breast implants and the like: breasts implants it's an "issue" mostly pertaining richer women, so it shouldn't be a problem for them paying something like 20% or 25% more in order to please males.

You're ignoring that fact that the NHS in the UK provides around 4,500 breast implant surgeries and treatment for various conditions each year. They are not all to please males.

[USS Monitor]

I thought you were a ship?

Ships are typically referred to as "she" by most sailors.

I am a "she," but for some reason my sig has not been very effective in getting people to use the correct pronouns. I guess ironclads aren't very feminine...

[The Wolven League]

I thought you were a ship?

Do you think ships don't have to deal with body-shaming? I got teased a lot about my appearance when I was young.

Ah, I see.

[Celseon]

You're ignoring that fact that the NHS in the UK provides around 4,500 breast implant surgeries and treatment for various conditions. They are not all to please males.

Apparently this "feminist" has never heard of breast cancer or mastectomies.

[The Wolven League]

So you're saying we shouldn't ban breast implants.

No.
Clare Chambers proposed to ban breast implants.
My idea is softer: I recognize she's right but I think about a massive awareness campaign and maybe even a special taxation on breast implants and the like: breasts implants it's an "issue" mostly pertaining richer women, so it shouldn't be a problem for them paying something like 20% or 25% more in order to please males.

"to please males"

You are speaking as if you were a non-human observing us and our actions.

[Fartsniffage]

Apparently this "feminist" has never heard of breast cancer or mastectomies.

Or MtF transitions, not that she'd give a toss about them, or people with serious body image problems.

[Chessmistress]

No.
Clare Chambers proposed to ban breast implants.
My idea is softer: I recognize she's right but I think about a massive awareness campaign and maybe even a special taxation on breast implants and the like: breasts implants it's an "issue" mostly pertaining richer women, so it shouldn't be a problem for them paying something like 20% or 25% more in order to please males.

You're ignoring that fact that the NHS in the UK provides around 4,500 breast implant surgeries and treatment for various conditions. They are not all to please males.

No, it seems to me that you're just using surgical health treatments like mastectomies and the likes as an excuse to justify the existence of the cosmetic surgical private business based on social pressure over women.
That's why I ignored you.

[Kaztropol]

I don't remember if the NHS funds cosmetic breast implants for much more than correction of severe asymmetry, and reconstruction after major surgery such as mastectomies as part of cancer treatment, and also reconstructions for some accident victims.

I think they fund implants where it can be proven that the patient is suffering severe psychological distress, which is a different issue than just the patient disliking their appearance.

NHS also funds reductions, where it can be proven the patient is in physical or psychological pain.

But generally, it has to be proven that the patient is having severe issues, for the NHS to do things.

[Kar-Esseria]

Hello to all, I quite recently discovered this book through Feminist Review praising it as a potential new frontier for both liberal and feminist thought.
Basically the author argues about the real limits of choices.
She wrote that there are cultural practices harmful to women and enforced by societal norms (aka patriarchy) that hurts the health of women, like in example breast implants, and that these practices should be outlawed by a government that really keep care of gender equality and women wellbeing, for the purpose to send a message and to begin a real change of cultural norms harmful to women.
Of course, that can even be framed as a limitation to the freedom of women, but the point is: it's real freedom if women are enforced by patriarchal cultural norms to basically perform a violent and harmful modification of their bodies?

What do you think, NSGs, about it?

More informations:

The author, a radical feminist from Cambridge University, UK
http://www.phil.cam.ac.uk/people/teachi ... mbers-page

The review
http://www.palgrave-journals.com/fr/jou ... 0832a.html

Chambers's use of the notion of ‘cosmetic knee implants’ to jolt readers into appreciating how thoroughly bizarre cosmetic breast implants are, in the absence of patriarchal norms and pressures: ‘Until breast implants seem as peculiar as knee implants, we cannot say that a woman chooses to have them for reasons divorced from patriarchy and thus that her decision is irrelevant to justice’ (p. 40). Throughout, Chambers's book draws fruitfully on two literatures – post-modern philosophy with its giants Foucault and Bourdieu, and analytic political philosophy with its giants Rawls and Raz (among others). These literatures are frequently kept separate in the academy and attract separate followings, but Chambers succeeds in bringing them to bear on one another. Plenty of feminists have tried to write books that have an impact on – in the sense of altering – mainstream, androcentric, liberal theory. But they have sometimes failed, perhaps because they are too dependent on jargon peculiar to gender studies, or because they do not engage enough with liberal theorists’ recent debates and preoccupations. Chambers' book deftly avoids both of these problems, so there is real potential here for this book to alter mainstream liberal thinking.

Another, and maybe more clear, review:
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/impact/fe ... -of-choice

All societies have social norms – unspoken rules that we live by if we want to fit in. In most Western countries, it is normal for men to wear trousers and not skirts. While some men might see this as a constraint, most will have not even thought about it, and would be surprised or embarrassed if skirt-wearing was suggested. So the idea of ‘normal’ is deeply ingrained, and is part of a natural human desire to blend into our social context.

But these norms can become more sinister if they lead a person to do something that is harmful to their health in order to conform. In many countries women are judged very strongly on their appearance, and there are many unwritten rules about how a woman should look – she should not have grey hair, or be round, or have breasts that are too small or too saggy.

Wearing make-up or dressing in a certain style are some of the ways in which women conform to these beauty norms. But these choices are not harmful, whereas invasive surgery – with all the potential complications it can bring – clearly is.

The power of social pressure

Chambers’ book challenges liberal and multicultural theories that see choice as the mark of a just society, and cultural norms as something to be protected at all costs. The argument goes that if someone does something by choice, even if it means they are worse off than other people, it’s not a problem.

Chambers points out that people make choices within the framework of social rules and pressures. She argues that this framework affects what options are open to an individual, and can even affect their desires.

In a society where women are not allowed to have certain jobs, their options are clearly limited. But even in a more open society, the desire to fit in with social norms can affect what we want to do. If a woman decides she wants breast implants, Chambers argues she is not making that decision in a vacuum. Social norms are influencing both her options and her preferences, and leading her to choose something which can have serious implications for her health.

People who believe bullshit like that shouldn't be allowed to teach at universities.

She's basically saying no woman wants breast implants for any reason other than to appease men, that women should not be allowed to get breast implants, and that women are incapable of making their own decisions without them linking back to wanting to fit in, that all women are willing to alter themselves for the sake of being more popular.

So she's basically a sexist who thinks women are dumb, easily impressionable, incapable of making their own decisions, and shouldn't be allowed a choice.

Furthermore, she mentions "serious implications" for a womans health when in reality, most women with breast implants don't get anything worse than the back pain associated with large breasts. Actual health issues caused by breast implants do exist but are very rare, and are typically the result of a bad surgeon or mistake.

Oh, and both genders/sexes are considered unattractive when overweight, not just women.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

So you're saying we shouldn't ban breast implants.

No.
Clare Chambers proposed to ban breast implants.
My idea is softer: I recognize she's right but I think about a massive awareness campaign and maybe even a special taxation on breast implants and the like: breasts implants it's an "issue" mostly pertaining richer women, so it shouldn't be a problem for them paying something like 20% or 25% more in order to please males.

Awareness for what? How do they harm women? It's not specified in the OP and I'm not reading three blogs/opinion pieces to find out.

[Fartsniffage]

You're ignoring that fact that the NHS in the UK provides around 4,500 breast implant surgeries and treatment for various conditions. They are not all to please males.

No, it seems to me that you're just using surgical health treatments like mastectomies and the likes as an excuse to justify the existence of the cosmetic surgical private business based on social pressure over women.
That's why I ignored you.

You should be arguing against breast reconstruction for your position to be remotely defensible. After all, isn't having two breasts, or any breasts at all simply conforming to social pressure and expectations?

[Chessmistress]

Apparently this "feminist" has never heard of breast cancer or mastectomies.

Or MtF transitions, not that she'd give a toss about them, or people with serious body image problems.

People with serious body image problems is the most hurted by social pressure: given they have a REAL mental problem, certified I mean, I think they should have FREE surgeries.
And these free surgeries should be paid, as like as the awareness campaign, by the revenues of the raised taxation on frivolous breast implants and the likes (like inflating lips).

[Wallenburg]

Ships are typically referred to as "she" by most sailors.

I am a "she," but for some reason my sig has not been very effective in getting people to use the correct pronouns. I guess ironclads aren't very feminine...

You're beautiful just the way you are, Monitor. Don't let those men walk all over you!

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Or MtF transitions, not that she'd give a toss about them, or people with serious body image problems.

People with serious body image problems is the most hurted by social pressure: given they have a REAL mental problem, certified I mean, I think they should have FREE surgeries.
And these free surgeries should be paid, as like as the awareness campaign, by the revenues of the raised taxation on frivolous breast implants and the likes (like inflating lips).

You can't tax freedom, CM.

[Celseon]

No, it seems to me that you're just using surgical health treatments like mastectomies and the likes as an excuse to justify the existence of the cosmetic surgical private business based on social pressure over women.
That's why I ignored you.

Of course, of course. It's not like you opened this thread with a work written by a radfem who wanted to ban the procedure outright, decried it as harmful yourself, said the motivating factor for obtaining the procedure was to conform with societal expectations about body image, and then proposed a tax on the procedure to make it harder to receive with no exceptions mentioned whatsoever.

[USS Monitor]

I am a "she," but for some reason my sig has not been very effective in getting people to use the correct pronouns. I guess ironclads aren't very feminine...

You're beautiful just the way you are, Monitor. Don't let those men walk all over you!

They need to walk all over me to keep things running. My guns don't load themselves, you know?

[Chessmistress]

No, it seems to me that you're just using surgical health treatments like mastectomies and the likes as an excuse to justify the existence of the cosmetic surgical private business based on social pressure over women.
That's why I ignored you.

Of course, of course. It's not like you opened this thread with a work written by a radfem who wanted to ban the procedure outright, decried it as harmful yourself, said the motivating factor for obtaining the procedure was to conform with societal expectations about body image, and then proposed a tax on the procedure to make it harder to receive with no exceptions mentioned whatsoever.

No, she propose to ban cosmetic breast implants.
If a woman have her breast damaged by an injury or something, the reconstruction is not unhealthy but healthy: it's just repairing the damages she have, for her psychological wellbeing.