Dying To Be Skinny - Who Is Really Responsible?

The French government wants to make it illegal to promote “extreme thinness” - with offences punishable by up to 3 years in jail and fines of up to €30,000. They consider pro-anorexia websites and rail-thin models as incitement causing suicide or death. So much for an individual being responsible for themselves.

As with any tragic topic, particularly one which predominately affects youth, eating disorders pluck the heartstrings. Mothers who struggle to keep their daughters alive grace the television screen in well-funded campaigns to stamp out anorexia and bulimia. Advertisers, fashion runways and magazines are regarded as the evil spreaders of negative imaging causing young girls everywhere to die in the pursuit of skinny.  Amidst all the drama and heartache no one ever seems to question the role of individual responsibility.

It’s a tough question; to what degree an individual should be responsible for themselves? Most governments now exist predominately based on a notion that they provide some service to the population which is governed. Like feudal tutelage, under which a ruler promises to protect people in exchange for tithes, modern governments are expected to act in the best interest of the people in exchange for taxes. Since much of the Western world has managed to find peace with itself, the threat of invasion or traditional war is practically non-existent, thus Western governments are increasingly micro-managing their populations. In some ways, absolving individuals of being responsible for themselves, guarantees a role for governments.

Deferring responsibility for ourselves to a higher authority, however, is a slippery slope. Regulating personal preference is a dangerous encroachment into the private realm. If we admit that we can’t manage the most basic aspects of life, such as our own self-preservation, at what point is that authority able to simply make all decisions about our well-being without even consulting us? After all, if we aren’t responsible, how can we be expected to make sound decisions?

The prevalent approach to squarely lay blame upon the fashion and entertainment industries suggests another troubling development in Western society: the diminishing role of the family in providing necessary life skills.  In yet another act of responsibility-absolution, many believe that the television and other media are the root cause of eating disorders. Traditionally, however, children develop patterns of self-image from their parents. So, the issue of parental responsibility should also be questioned: if the media has this great an influence, who is doing the parenting? Of course, this will be the most painful question for parents to answer. No one wants to admit culpability in the troubles plaguing one’s children. Yet in our choice to develop a society which doesn’t just open the doors of equal opportunity for women, it pushes them through without an alternative, children who are not responsible for themselves is but one of the consequences. This is what happens when a system raises our children.  

Banning the grotesquely skinny won’t make eating disorders disappear. If there is demand for the ultra-skinny image, the thin model will continue to be offered. The issue of why we have this problem (which I might add is likely unique to a pampered society that can afford to obsess about such things) is more complex and systemic than grieving parents and lawmakers wish to believe. The most unfortunate aspect of it all is that given the tragic nature of the subject the notion of who is responsible is so entrenched that the issue isn’t something allowed for debate. In this sense, grief and tragedy trump logic and reason.

This entry was posted on April 16 2008 at 19:19 and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.