Judging Others’ Choices

An article over at The Federalist posited an interesting question about what society accepts and what it does not. Why Is Transgender An Identity But Anorexia A Disorder, is about where we draw the line between individual choice and mental illness, but it raises a broader subject: Why are some things we do to ourselves and some things we believe about ourselves accepted, but others are not?

Why is it OK to cover one’s self in tattoos and piercings, split one’s tongue, and have sub-dermal implants in order to look like a lizard, but not OK to have ribs removed, breasts and lips enhanced, and eyes reshaped in order to look like a Barbie doll?

Why is being very thin frowned upon enough to warrant legislation but being very fat protected both societally and legally?

Should men who use Synthol be looked at differently than women who get breast implants?

And, yes, why have we been told not to question anyone who wants to identify as a different gender and/or have reassignment surgery, but to worry to the point of intervention about anyone who starves herself. Is this distinction rooted in dispassionate psychiatric science, or is it the result of political correctness and social justice pressure?

My position on all these questions is generally that it’s not my place to tell someone else how to act, feel or think, not government’s place to issue mandates, and not the social justice warriors’ place to demand compliance. The author echoes this libertarian-leaning position. It does behoove me and every live-and-let-live person, though, to recognize that there are, in fact, mental disorders, that mental illness is a real thing (despite what Tom Cruise has to say on the subject). Where do we (or more accurately, those who actually study this subject) draw the line, and how do we draw that line dispassionately and absent the influence of society’s opinion makers?

And, when do we simply recognize that many of our judgments that Person X is being true to him or herself but that Person Y is suffering from an improper or incorrect body image are based on a mix of our own biasses and what we’re told by social justice scolds?

Is Lizard Man mentally ill? Is Barbie Doll? Who are we to judge?

Counter-arguments, some decades old, are that some personal choices send the “wrong message” to others, especially the impressionable, the oppressed, and the weak. In other words, to those that some have deemed in need of protection and intervention. Thus, Lizard Man may be a daring, cutting-edge performance artist, but Barbie Doll may be someone corrupted by archaic societal norms and putting forth a harmful image. Isn’t Barbie Doll, however, simply exercising female empowerment and embracing self-determination? And, isn’t Lizard Man dooming himself to a life on the margins, highly unlikely to find gainful employment in countless professions?

What of the health impact associated with the “fat-acceptance” movement? It’s likely that advocates for fat acceptance will not advocate for anorexia-acceptance, but both extremes are harmful to health. Isn’t so much public policy nowadays directed at coaxing or forcing people to live healthier? Smoking is attacked via “where” restrictions, via taxation, via public ad campaigns, and via social pressure. Trans-fats are banned in some places, chain restaurants are forced to post calorie counts and salt warnings, soda taxes are being proposed and imposed, and even vaping, which by most measures is far safer than smoking, is being attacked. Why, then, do society and government press for acceptance of a more directly relevant adverse impact to one’s health?

What of other messages sent? Perhaps in a couple decades or half a century, one will be able to successfully interview at a top tier law firm with tricolor hair, a half-shaved scalp, multiple facial piercings, tattoos across one’s forehead and giant rings in one’s earlobes, but not today. Isn’t declaring that such things should be accepted a message that harms the economic and career prospects of those who need protecting?

It’s not the province of opinion makers to browbeat anyone who doesn’t agree with them into submitting to the norms they declare to be proper. It’s also a reversal of roles in a free society. Contrary to Spock’s observation, the needs of the many do not outweigh the needs of the one, when the “needs” are one’s rights and liberties. My individual choices may not be infringed because others may choose to ape them and in doing so harm themselves.

Once we realize that the social mores we’re told we must conform to are the result of a oppressor/oppressed world view, we can properly judge them. Once we realize that what we’re told we must accept and reject is rooted in the self-important proclamations of white knights, we can more easily filter them out of our own information processing.

Back to the original question. I’m not an expert, so I have no basis to proclaim an answer. I try to the best of my ability to be a live-and-let-live sort. I try to live by the observation made by Sergeant Greevey from the first season of Law & Order, “I don’t judge – you can never know someone else’s story.”

What I do know is that there are people who judge on our behalf, who decide not only what they should believe, but what we should believe. Sometimes they’re right, and they can and should make their case in such situations. But, especially when it comes to others’ choices, they conflate personal opinions rooted in personal biases with objective truth and unassailable correctness. Judgmentalism is a hobby horse of mine, and I believe that it is at the root of much of the societal discord we witness today.

A final note. It is apt to quote Matthew 7:13:

Judge not, lest you be judged.

I do so with a caveat. The Bible doesn’t tell us to dismiss others’ bad behaviors, but to realize that we will be judged by the same standards as we look to apply to those others. Thus, we should not presume that, should we decide not to embrace fat-acceptance, for example, that others resist the calls to do so. Liberty includes self-determination, and that extends to our beliefs, both about others and about those who judge others.