government control - good? bad?

[lI1|1!]

in light of the various debates which have occured here regarding how much control the government should have in our lives (climbing hood in winter, teaching evolution is schools, environmental regulations, etc.) i thought the following story provided a fascinating example of said regulations. on the surface it is a public health campaign and few would argue anorexia is a good thing. at the same time it has many of the earmarks seen as so dangerous in other areas: public mind control, big brother, curtailing freedom of expression, you're incapable of making your own decisions, etc. does this cast doubts on whether or not it is possible to establish objective criteria for how much the government should try to control our lives?

 

from cnn

 

Spain reminds designers the emaciated look is out

 

• Designers to standardize women's sizes to promote healthy body images

• Program bans window displays featuring clothes smaller than a U.S. 6, UK 10

• Fashionable image should conform with "reality of the Spanish population"

 

MADRID, Spain (AP) -- Spain's government has reached an agreement with major fashion designers, including the owner of the Zara chain, to standardize women's clothing sizes to promote healthy body images.

 

Designers such as Cortefiel, Mango, El Corte Ingles and Inditex, which owns Zara, agreed to take part in the program, which was announced Tuesday.

 

The program, designed by the Health Ministry, will also prevent those companies from using window displays featuring clothes smaller than a European size 38 (usually a 10 in Britain, 6 in the United States). They will have five years to phase in the change.

 

"It is not reasonable for a modern and advanced society to establish stereotypes of beauty that are far removed from the social reality of a community. It is everyone's commitment that beauty and health go hand in hand," Health Minister Elena Salgado said at a signing ceremony Tuesday.

Spanish fashion show banned overly thin models

 

The agreement follows last year's unprecedented decision by Spain's main fashion show, Madrid's Pasarela Cibeles, to ban some models from the catwalk on grounds they were too thin, saying this looked encouraged eating disorders among young people.

 

The Health Ministry's program aims to end a situation in which a woman who buys a size 40 dress from one designer may not fit in a size 40 garment from another designer. The ministry said the differences sometimes lead women to feel compelled to lose weight.

 

Designers should be encouraged to "promote a healthy physical image that conforms with the reality of the Spanish population," the ministry said in a statement.

 

The agreement also stipulates that European size 46 no longer be specifically labeled as a larger size.

 

As part of the effort to standardize sizes, the ministry plans to measure 8,500 Spanish girls and women between the ages of 12 and 70 to determine the true shapes of Spanish women's bodies.

[archenemy]

Wow, what a good question. I hadn't thought of that side, and it is a very important side to consider.

 

My first reaction is that some of the things you list as being threats posed by gov't control ( public mind control, curtailing freedom of expression, you're incapable of making your own decisions) kind of match up with the dominant media control.... I wish I had a more developed point of view on this, but that is my first swing.

 

Thoughts?

[sobo]

... I wish I had a more developed point of view on this, but that is my first swing. Thoughts?

 

My thoughts are belonged to the government. I have no free thoughts.

 

Seriously, I think this is over the top as regards gov't. control of private industry. The line that got me was...

 

...The agreement also stipulates that European size 46 no longer be specifically labeled as a larger size...

 

Gimme a break. Now the Spaniards have PC.

I don't care by what metric you measure it, if you're wearing a size 46, you're f*cking fat.

 

[archenemy]

Unless its a 46DD, then you're popular with the boys.

[lI1|1!]

my main thought on this is that true objectivity is an illusion. whenever decisions are required based on inconclusive evidense politics dictates that people will search for a middle ground. people will look for an over-riding principle that can be universally employed to avoid having to come to definative conclusions about the basic question that poses the problem (evolution, global warming, nation building, etc). inevitably, however, the positions people hold will be based on their interpretations of the data or their dogmatic beliefs. in a sense, the blindfold on the woman holding a scale who symbolizes justice is wishful thinking.

 

there is no conclusive scientific evidense that anorexia is caused by dress sizing or fashion models. like many behavioral disorders it is poorly understood and instead debated endlessly among psychologists of different orientations. the victims of the spanish legislation are only a handful of fashion designers and their underfed models, so it's probably worth a try if it could possibly save a few lives. i mostly put it forth as an example of the illogical nature of society's habitual way of trying to make collective decisions.

 

so many political debates come and go on cc.com, with few changes in anyones perception of the issues. carry on.

[carolyn]

From what I have read this doesnt seem like a government mandate, more of a recommendation agreed upon between the government and a private company. This was obviously sparked by recent events in the fashion industry (as was mentioned). It sounds like your concern is the possibility of a hidden agenda within the government when implementing initiatives such as this. Yes?

 

Thats a tough one for sure!

I definately dont have an answer, but I sure can throw out some thoughts.

 

As the population increases, a lot more damage seems to be done to our environment and health (body and mind). We are also much more advanced in technology and research, bringing about more awareness to subjects most hadnt often thought about before. Government and society in general wind up paying up the wazoo for what we now see as problems (global warming, eating disorders, drug addiction, smoking, cell phone usage in cars,lack of insured indiv, etc). Individuals obviously seem to have a difficult time making changes with these problems, thus government steps in.

 

Because of the example you used and my familiarity with the subject, Im going to keep going with it.

 

In my experience media seems to be one of the major factors contributing to eating disorders (and many other societal 'issues'). I mentioned choices, earlier. What kind of choice am I given when I ride the bus downtown and Im flashed with billboard after billboard of half-naked, anorexic women, looking glamorous next to a hot guy? Talk about mind control?!?!? Or newspaper ads, magazine ads, TV, store displays, etc? Its in your face constantly. There are only two ways to avoid it. Keep your eyes closed - always or have a high enough self-esteem to help you from doubting yourself. The second option might be a little more feasible. Yet, how do you raise someone with that kind of self-esteem when everything around them contridicts it?

 

It was mentioned in another thread that issues like this should be taken up with the parents of a child. Yet, how many of us are parents, work with children, or have contact with them on a daily basis? Almost everyone! So, doesnt it then make it a societal issue? And to think these little people are the one's who will take care of us in our old age - whether they are our own or not.

 

A lot of choices are taken away with other issues due to the media - advertising the next best gas guzzler, condemning those who dont believe in 'god', stating an MLU would absolutely saved a life, and so on.... We pretty much did this to ourselves. Media = selling something (idea or product)= money. So maybe its not even the medias fault. Maybe its the importance of money. The need for money stems from fear (lack of having what you need) and status (feeding the ego).

 

Lets just get rid of money, have a free for all, then all our problems will be solved.

 

Boy, did I digress! Im babbling. I dont have answers, obviously. I can definately offer some insight and education on eating disorders if that is of interest to anyone.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Government should not be in the business of legislating taste. Check out their coiffure and ensembles on CSPAN and you'll see what I mean.

[JayB]

I think it's clear that the fashion magazines and the unhealthy body images that they promote were responsible for the women in 15th century Venice deliberately swallowing tapeworms to maintain their figures too. Ditto for all of those corsets and whatnot - definitely all the media's fault.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Perhaps the parents and peers of anorexic, spanish teens should not be allowed to see the skinny model ads. That might hit a bit closer to at least one of the roots of the problem.

[lI1|1!]

It sounds like your concern is the possibility of a hidden agenda within the government when implementing initiatives such as this. Yes?

 

i don't have any concerns here, if anything i think the legislation is a good idea. on the other hand i don't want to carry an MLU.

 

i don't think there is an answer here, just an observation of the process. that's interesting your take on it was more about the media.

 

speaking of media frenzy: Of Gay Sheep, Modern Science and Bad Publicity

[sobo]

Unless its a 46DD, then you're popular with the boys.

 

Naaaaaaaah, that's still just plain fat. My wife wears a 36DD, and I can't keep 'em under control at recess.

46DD would just be too damn much to handle!

[archenemy]

Where can I get a tapeworm?

[JayB]

I think a much better approach to this problem would be to address it through argument, reason, and persuasion rather than state-enforced compulsion. Worked against fur, and I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work here.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Where can I get a tapeworm?

 

The trekking season in Nepal is coming up....

[tvashtarkatena]

Much 'preventative' legislation (TV violence, aneroxia, ad nauseum) is based more on kneejerk reaction of the most vocal constituents than actual data linking the object of regulation to the actual problem.

 

In the case of anorexia, which I unfortunately know too much about because a friend is dealing with an anorexic daughter, the issue has little to do with skinny models and much to do with the personality and history of the mother and the nature, particularly the competitiveness, of the child's school environment, all juxtaposed with the child's own disposition. Removing the uber Auschwitz babes wouldn't do a thing one way or the other.

[archenemy]

I wonder what percentage of people actually find the heroin-chic look attractive? I don't hear many folks say its appealing; so why does it still reign?

[G-spotter]

If media images can't influence kids, then why is violence OK on TV but not sex until late at night?

[tvashtarkatena]

I wonder what percentage of people actually find the heroin-chic look attractive? I don't hear many folks say its appealing; so why does it still reign?

 

I don't know...I just love hearin' those bones rattle.

[archenemy]

If media images can't influence kids, then why is violence OK on TV but not sex until late at night?

Hey now, fighting is the American way. Fucking has to wait.

[tvashtarkatena]

Cooking shows during the day, violence prime time, sex late at night.

 

This reminds of a saying from an old Navy buddy, Sargeant Bill Crenshaw, USMC, who we used to call "Cancerbitch" because he'd always greet you by saying "Hey, bitch, gotta cancer (cigarette)? The guy stood about 5'4" and had a five o'clock shadow at 8 in the morning. Anyway, he used to tell us:

 

"If you can't eat it, kill it. If you can't kill it, fuck it."

 

The most succinct definition of the American Way I've ever heard.

Edited January 25, 2007 by tvashtarkatena

[foraker]

[snark]

If there are hot guys in all the billboards, why aren't more guys suffering to look like that?

And what about all those ads that make men look like morons who can't tie their own shoelaces and a long-suffering but loving spouse who solves all their problems in a thrice? Oy! The pressure!

[/snark]

 

To follow up tvash's (tark? the tarkster? the tarkulator?) point, I have a friend in the international modeling biz and she pretty much validates what you said. From her description, every one of her colleagues is completely messed up and has these horrible dysfunctional family histories. She herself isn't immune to to the latter, but is fortunately from the eating disorder problem.

 

archenemy, that's a good question. since ads are usually driven by client demand, I'd imagine it has to do with clients trying to be 'edgy' instead of pushing a particular ideal of 'beauty'. What better way to separate youth from their dollars than to sell them something that makes them feel they aren't mainstream? After all, the ads are ultimately trying to sell clothes, nothing more.

[archenemy]

Good point.

I think of "edgy" as a sharper word than "trendy", but basically the same. I wonder how long this trend will last. It seems like fashion folks have been fading away for a long time now.

[foraker]

If media images can't influence kids, then why is violence OK on TV but not sex until late at night?

 

Because, ultimately, we are, in general, a puritanical nation at heart and explaining violence to kids is easier and more comfortable than explaining sex, groping, and complex love triangles. For the tin-foil hat crowd, TV violence ensures healthy military recruitment.

[archenemy]

soldiers need to get laid too. Healthy recruitment of sexually compliant partners is obviously undervalued.

[carolyn]

In the case of anorexia, which I unfortunately know too much about because a friend is dealing with an anorexic daughter, the issue has little to do with skinny models and much to do with the personality and history of the mother and the nature, particularly the competitiveness, of the child's school environment, all juxtaposed with the child's own disposition. Removing the uber Auschwitz babes wouldn't do a thing one way or the other.

 

As someone who personally dealt with an eating disorder for over 20 and now work with women who struggle with an ed, I have to disagree with disregarding the influence of the media. It is by far not the only factor. You are correct that the influence of family, peers, personality, possibly biological factors all play a role in the development of an eating disorder. Media images feed the disorder. Looking at photos of skinny women serves as a motivation to continue on your quest of starvation. If these images dont contribute to the development, at the very least they contribute to the persistance to remain thin. Thin (at least portrayed in the media) = control, love from others, attention, acknowledgement, admiration, beauty, power....the list goes on.

 

It would be great to not have those dealing with this problem not look at the media. Yet, how does one go about doing that without walking around the rest of their lives with their eyes closed? Its everywhere! Its like asking a newly recovered alcoholic to spend a certain amount of time each day in the bar surrounded by a bunch of drunk friends. Doesnt mean they will absolutely turn back to alcohol, but it sure doesnt help their odds.

 

Tshav-I wish your friend and her daughter the best.