It's interesting that you read "bodily choices" as primarily weight-related here. I was thinking about that, but also about clothing, plastic surgeries, piercings, etc---things that are more obviously the result of a decision-making process. (I.e, "gross--he/she shouldn't wear that!").
On a separate note, I'm wary of aligning political beliefs too easily with "choice." What constitutes choice? The way I've been trained to talk about it--as a staunch liberal in a university humanities department--generally rests on the assumption that everyone is well-schooled enough in Enlightenment objectivity to have thought intelligently about their own political positions in a way that could classify them as conscious choices. But the terrifying popularity of cult-style politics throughout history--from the French Revolutionaries to the Tea Party--makes me wonder if, for example, someone raised in a deeply-religious/deeply-partisan/deeply-anythinged household has any more choice about his/her politics than someone born with a genetic predisposition to obesity has a "choice" about his/her weight. They'd both take a lot of work to alter (Hell, I sometimes wonder if my own faith in Enlightenment objectivity is something I was raised with and never bothered to challenge!).
...moreover, to deconstruct my original post, where did we even get this idea that it's ok to judge someone's *choices,* but not ok to judge something they can't help? Our faith in free will as an accurate--and indeed the only acceptable--barometer of value is astonishing. (I share it, of course--I feel too uncomfortable having faith in any other system!)
It's interesting that you read "bodily choices" as primarily weight-related here. I was thinking about that, but also about clothing, plastic surgeries, piercings, etc---things that are more obviously the result of a decision-making process. (I.e, "gross--he/she shouldn't wear that!").
On a separate note, I'm wary of aligning political beliefs too easily with "choice." What constitutes choice? The way I've been trained to talk about it--as a staunch liberal in a university humanities department--generally rests on the assumption that everyone is well-schooled enough in Enlightenment objectivity to have thought intelligently about their own political positions in a way that could classify them as conscious choices. But the terrifying popularity of cult-style politics throughout history--from the French Revolutionaries to the Tea Party--makes me wonder if, for example, someone raised in a deeply-religious/deeply-partisan/deeply-anythinged household has any more choice about his/her politics than someone born with a genetic predisposition to obesity has a "choice" about his/her weight. They'd both take a lot of work to alter (Hell, I sometimes wonder if my own faith in Enlightenment objectivity is something I was raised with and never bothered to challenge!).
...moreover, to deconstruct my original post, where did we even get this idea that it's ok to judge someone's *choices,* but not ok to judge something they can't help? Our faith in free will as an accurate--and indeed the only acceptable--barometer of value is astonishing. (I share it, of course--I feel too uncomfortable having faith in any other system!)
Reply
Leave a comment