People Miss the Whole Point of Political Correctness

Ah, the joy of r/fatlogic.

I already knew what the commenters would write as soon as I saw this. This argument has been applied to other forms of verbal abuse and microaggressions such as sexual harassment, racial discrimination, and misgendering: you don’t get to decide how someone should feel in response to how you treat them. If someone tells you that the manner and content of your speech causes them to feel uncomfortable, afraid, or sad, the burden had ought to be on you to change your behavior instead of them sucking it up. I generally agree with this maxim, but I don’t think this is the best argument for why people should check their privilege and bigotry. People on the other side of this – usually conservatives and libertarians – claim that feelings are primarily one’s own responsibility (though conservatives are plenty offended by certain things). And people can feel offended about anything. That in itself does not make all feelings logical. Honoring everyone’s feelings as truth would probably amount to cultural relativism when feelings are shared among groups – this dreaded so-called “identity politics”.

I would caution two things. One, it is technically correct to acknowledge that someone has a feeling. Feelings are not under anyone’s control. They are automatic. They can be rational, but they don’t need to be. Erasing someone’s feeling because it’s illogical or inconvenient to you is a pointless endeavor. And two, you shouldn’t change your language or behavior around someone because JUST because it offends them personally. You should do it because you understand the specific ways that people are treated in society based on their group membership and how that creates a different experience than yours – even if they haven’t experienced it yet. It’s the reason why doing blackface is wrong even if your black friend doesn’t know the history and tells you they don’t care. This political correctness crusade has never been about exhausting yourself by constantly catering to individuals’ whims. It’s about understanding general patterns.

If you yell at a woman, especially if you are a man, you should understand that A) as a woman she might have had the experience of being abused by a man in the past – a particular dynamic that most men can’t experience, and B) she probably experiences low levels of verbal harassment most of the time, and your behavior will add to this accumulation of stress.

If you’ve been thin all your life and some of your friends make fun of fat people, with jokes ranging from playfully using fat stereotypes to being downright annoyed by them, you will probably laugh along with them even if you’re neutral or apathetic toward fat people personally. But then what happens if a year or two later you’ve gained 60 pounds? You’re not just so fat that only you notice – you’re so fat that everyone else has noticed too. You’ve never been one of “those people”, but now you are. How do you think all the jokes and insults your friends made about fat people are going to affect you? You’ll probably hate yourself and you won’t know what to do. You probably won’t have many sympathetic friends or relatives to fall back on.

I guess what I’m trying to say is, you can’t just assume that since an individual has not yet experienced explicit instances of discrimination for their group affiliation(s), it’s okay to make jokes or share negative views of their group. You might have a black or Muslim friend who may have been subject to systemic discrimination but happens to not have had insults and slurs hurled at them by strangers or been threatened with racist symbols or Islamophobic messages. But they can still experience these things in the future, and if they do they will probably not recognize it right away, because you’ve been deriding Muslims or black people for years. Just because you don’t see them as “one of those people” and you’ve convinced them that they aren’t, that doesn’t mean they won’t eventually be treated that way by others.

The point of political correctness is to try – at least TRY – to educate yourself about the experiences of marginalized groups and use what you’ve learned to treat strangers and kin with more empathy and respect. But more than that, it’s about fighting for systemic change; a kind smile and a conversation will only do so much. It’s dishonest and misleading to reduce fights for social equity to policing individuals’ language. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen. But people who are truly “woke” know that people get their beliefs from SOMEWHERE, and they spend more of their time fighting the institutions that produce loyal followers rather than simply shaming people into compliance, or exiling them as punishment for their personal failings.

The Word “Overweight” Really Doesn’t Mean Anything

We’re back again with a hard-to-search query, and lo and behold it’s still about fat stigma. This time I’m trying to investigate the use of the term “overweight”, looking for nuanced analyses of its multiple uses and their consequences. But I have come back empty-handed. And whenever that happens, I BLOG.

THIS…. this is that blog.

I was attempting to watch a film analysis on YouTube and when this guy referred to the main character as “overweight”, I couldn’t watch anymore. Would people please, please stop using this word?! It’s not just offensive, it’s stupid. It’s a stupid word. I know what he meant. He meant fat. But fat in a “kind” way, in a way that suggests… not that fat, just fat enough for it to be noticeable. First off, you’re not granting anyone a kindness when you use this euphemism. The reason you’re using it is because you want to indicate that you can see a difference in someone’s body proportions, shape, or composition that qualifies them as “fat”, but that they are not REALLY fat, like, the real fat people over there that are actually the ones who are ill or weird or subhuman. It’s not “fat” – it’s “fat lite”. “Fat-ish”. But by doing so, you’re reinforcing the notion that there is a level of fat that is too far gone, too different, too inexcusable. You’re reinforcing the belief that there is any amount of fat that someone has that could make them chiefly responsible, and that we know exactly the point when someone is so fat that it amounts to an illness. But more importantly, when we say the word “overweight” we really mean 3 things, and we use them interchangeably:

Having so much fat that your physical or mental* health is worse than ideal**
Having a particular body shape – some proportion of fat that is intermediate between the proportions commonly seen in the media and the fattest person you can think of
Having a proportion of fat that you think is greater than average

And by “average” I again mean consistent with common media depictions. In reality, many people are fatter than what you see on social networking apps and TV. According to the CDC , the average (mean) height for a female in the United States is about 5 feet, 4 inches (162 cm) and the average weight is about 170 pounds (77 kg). A rough estimate for the resulting average BMI is around 29, which is considered “overweight” by medical authorities. Will a female with a BMI of 29 LOOK fat? It depends, both on the proportions of the person and the schema of the observer. Are they so fat that their health is suffering? Perhaps, but it would still be difficult to know that with any certainty just by looking at them. Are they TYPICAL? Yes, yes they are typical.

I hope people will see that the criteria I listed above are, for the most part, mutually exclusive. People who look “chubby” are likely not over-weight in the sense that they are fatter than average. They probably are average. There are many people who have physical and mental disorders that we associate with being fat, but we don’t suspect it, because they aren’t fat. And besides, at least 80% of American adults may be “overfat”, which is largely to do with visceral fat depots (surrounding your guts); this figure includes a significant proportion of people whose BMI would classify them as having “normal weight”. Where’s our “concern” for them?

So please, let’s stop saying “overweight”. What should we use instead? Oh hell I don’t have ALL the answers. …. Let’s just say FAT for now and I dunno… use modifiers? I’m open to suggestions.

Thanks for reading.

For more on fat stigma, I like this blog post from Scientific American:

Fat is Not the Problem – Fat Stigma Is

*Being “obese” is associated with a greater likelihood of suffering from mental illnesses. Currently, the direction of causation constitutes a chicken-or-egg debate, but it seems that at least in the case of major depression, there is some evidence that both are likely to lead to each other. The mechanisms are not yet well understood. We do know that fat stigma causes increased risks for mental and physiological illnesses irrespective of BMI. Mental health may also suffer from the neurochemical and endocrine disruption that can occur with a diet of high-processed foods and a lack of regular exercise, but these conditions hold true for everybody.

**”Ideal” is, of course, subjective.

The Morality of Fat – Levels of Misconception

Tiers of the Morality of Fat:

1) Being fat does not always mean you’re unhealthy.

2) Being healthy is not always ethical.

People use their physical and mental stamina in order to oppress others, and the pleasure that they can experience can make them apathetic and ignorant to the ills of the world and other people in it.

3) Being ethical is not just about being prosocial; it’s also about living the good life.

4) Being prosocial is not always possible.

Claims that fat people over-consume at the expense of lower income people across the world, or at the expense of the environment, may have some validity. But on the whole, everybody in the middle class who live in developed nations use a great deal of energy in their daily lives, such that any additional costs from eating more food and requirements of supplementary healthcare are unlikely to be proportionally significant. More importantly, most middle and lower class people in developed nations face systemic barriers to having affordable healthy food and time for exercise, as well as mental healthcare for disorders like addiction and anxiety. Asking people to simply put in more effort toward eliminating their need for consumption cannot be enough.

5) Living the good life is subjective.

For some people, living a longer life or having lots of physically demanding experiences is important. But they’re not the only keys to a happy life, and some goods that come from being alive actually come at the expense of a longer life or being able to have lots of physical experiences, irrespective of how fat you are or how much you eat. You can’t have it all. It’s important to some people spend a majority of their time making art, solving puzzles, or enjoying lots of food. You can’t just assume that these things are less valuable. Though it can be argued that changing your diet and activity level can boost your performance and enjoyment of these experiences as well, that is true only to a point. Specializing in anything you enjoy still requires some sacrifice, and being human is about more than just being in tune with your biology.

6) Living the life you want is not always possible.

The majority of people who go on some kind of diet program do not experience sustainable weight loss. Exercise burns significantly fewer calories than people think. Fat loss may be possible in the near future for significant segments of the population, but not unless there are substantial changes in food access, job security, healthcare access, education, and media advertising. For now at least, most of us will have to accept the fact that we are going to get fatter, or stay fat, for a while. Exercise is still beneficial in a lot of ways other than simply losing fat, but it’s also something that is difficult for many people to do consistently. Moreover, people are naturally unlucky about all sorts of things, not just in the realm of fat. Some people respond to calorie restriction better than others; some people have more resources to support them than others. Some people grow up with physical activities and healthy eating as positive and reliable parts of their lives. Many do not. People have impairments, deformities, or injuries that they are born with or acquire later in life – cancers, blindness, missing limbs – that carve out life paths with very different outcomes. For these people, joy and achievement cannot look the same as it does for average people. That’s not necessarily a negative thing, but oftentimes people with disabilities have to be more creative and tenacious when society does not give them a simple blueprint for what experiences will make them happy, much less what actions they can take to make them happen.

Worst of all, depression can make this entire journey not seem worth it. Life is inherently full of suffering, confusion, grief, and regret. Sometimes this is downright intolerable. Everyone deserves the opportunity to change their circumstances so they can have new experiences and respond differently to life’s challenges, and even when people have depression… a new job, a new friend, or a new home may be all it takes to begin to make that happen. You could be like me, a person whose anxiety is frequently so bad that I overestimate the risks of physical harm and social embarrassment for trying new things, and I underestimate my worth, my capabilities, and my capacity to handle setbacks, such that I rarely enjoy the benefits of change. But there are those people for whom these resources are out of sight or out of reach for a long, long time. And there are also people who may never respond positively to these changes even when they occur. Human life is messy, and in this very fundamental way people can have vastly different inner worlds, and some people are more different than others. I can only offer this: you can never be fully sure that you are one of the people that can never benefit from a change in your life. But I would not harass even a loved one to stay alive and look for new possibilities no matter what. To do such a thing is not only presumptuous; it is selfish. And above all, it is cruel.

Why I Wish I Could Shake Using Male Pronouns

The biggest incentive I have to stop gendering men is that I do not want to invite the opportunity for people to gender me as a man any more than they already do. To illustrate, in the situation I had at Target, these nice women associates teamed up to help me locate a backrest pillow. After a male associate informed one of these ladies over walkie-talkie that there was just a rather fluffy looking one, the lady stuttered for a moment and after regaining her composure pressed the associate to look for something else, claiming that the customer she was helping (me) was a male and that the item in question might be too “um… feminine”. After the initial shock I tried being nice and I leaned it and clapped my hands down and said: “that’s okay, it’s fine, it doesn’t matter to me, I’ll look at it”. This woman was what… trying to protect my shattered male ego? This is a more innocuous example; experiences with men have been far worse. If I stop people from gendering me, it’s not about “you need to get my pronoun right so I feel recognized” – it’s consequential in how you are going to treat me in a conversation. If you gender me as a man, you are almost certain to treat me differently. You’ll assume all sorts of things about me, like that I respect authority or traditionalism or nice suits or stocks or mechanics. You’ll tone down your emotional intelligence and assume I don’t want to receive affection or concern. You’ll have expectations of me to perform in a leadership role that I can’t fulfill, or worse, be emotionally stable, which is probably never going to happen.

Personal Responsibility and a Globalist Pandemic

One of my issues with personal responsibility is that oftentimes you the individual are made to feel responsible for things that are actually out of your control. In reality, these things can be caused by nature or by other people who have power over you. For many people in the West, this is a difficult concept to grasp. We feel so personally liable for our failures that we’ll hesitate to make a change if it risks acknowledging we messed up.

We would rather feel shame for our failures than admit we’ve been powerless.

That’s why much of our time is spent acting on the premise that we are shameful instead of the premise that circumstances are (currently) not under our control. For me, this has resulted in much of my life being a state of addiction or isolation.

When it comes to a problem like the COVID pandemic, individualist thinking truly becomes a curse. I was walking into an elevator to go up to my apartment and two guys, chatting, came in nonchalantly as I turned around. I figured they were going down so I said truthfully that I was going up. They were like, “oh ok” and left. I came back to my place thinking I should have said, “What are you people, stupid?” I anticipate they may have responded with indignation. Would they have? I don’t know. I’m not confrontational with strangers. The point is, we seem to have disagreed as to whether you should get in an elevator with someone during the pandemic. My current thinking is, no. What reason would they have to share an elevator with me instead of waiting for an empty car? Aren’t they concerned I could have the virus? Couldn’t they have it? Maybe it’s too scary to think about, so they’re in denial. I know that when I go to see my mom, sometimes I’m reluctant to wash my hands BEFORE leaving. When I get to her place I wash before I do anything else. But to wash my hands before I leave my apartment is to suggest that I may have the virus. Guilt usually wins over, and I end up washing both times. I think sometimes, “I’m a careful person. I know I’M clean.” But the truth is, we slip up, and little exposures to people and surfaces accumulate over time. We just can’t KNOW every little thing that affects us. And why would we want to anyway? How exhausting. That’s why I just wash my hands. I don’t have the power to not get infected. I do have the power to help prevent infecting others. Besides, would I be suggesting that I only care about not getting my family sick? That’s not just selfish, it’s stupid. My immediate family doesn’t form the entirety of my support network. In times like this we are forced to realize we live in a much bigger world then we think. The actions of people on the other side of the planet have come to impact all of our lives.

We have been lied to about what has been under our control. As such, we have been made responsible for increasingly ridiculous things. To survive the pandemic, and to fight for true freedom in the future, we must respond to these forces that have held up late-20^th century society in a matter-of-fact way. We were always this powerless. We just never knew how much.

Greek Identity

What is the identity of Greeks today? Who is a Greek? What does it mean to be Greek? What do the Greeks of the modern age have to contribute in terms of their beliefs and experiences that are distinct from the contributions made by the Classical Greeks?

Much of the Greek PR aims to highlight the legacy and culture of the Classical Greeks: their philosophy, literature, architecture, and science. But when I got to thinking about it I realized that modern Greeks are a different people than those older Greeks and have a different cultural makeup – namely, that of an Orthodox Christian, Roman people for 1000 years that were under Islamic, Turkish leadership for another couple hundred years. You see this very strongly in the food. For example, most filo pastries are Ottoman inventions and exist in modern Turkey as well. Is there a lasting legacy of Classical Greece in the modern Greek state? Absolutely. But no more than all the other peoples that should be considered equal inheritors of Classical Greek culture, which at the very least includes all the peoples who live in countries that were formally territories of the Western Roman Empire and all the places that the Romans occupied and traded. That includes England, Portugal, Spain, France, and Italy, but also any Germanic or Slavic nation that uses a Latin or Latin-derived alphabet. By extension, this includes the peoples who live in former colonies of the European powers in the 15^th century, constituting the English-, French-, Spanish-, and Portuguese-speaking world. All these peoples have cultures that can trace parts of their origins to Classical Greece. In that sense, much of the world is no less “Greek” than the citizens of the Hellenic Republic or the descendants of the Greek diaspora of the 20^th century, such as myself.

What is noteworthy, however, is the distinct cultural attitudes, practices, and worldview of the new “Greeks” – these Turkish- and Muslim-influenced Byzantine Roman people. Who are these people, I wonder? What new things do they have to teach us? What is unique about their perspective?