Hamlet has run a couple of articles about fat chicks protesting a store with the sign ‘No Fat Chicks’. (Link) Everyone commenting seems to think this is a serious ‘body shaming’ issue.
Hamlet made an effort to avoid promoting the store with The Sign, ‘No Fat Chicks’. But, the brand name is visible in the images he used so it doesn’t take long to figure out which store is being talked about, Back to Graceful.
It is hard to tell how the protest is going. Hamlet saw a bunch of people protesting. This morning there are 2 and they show as AFK. I suppose protests are boring…
Reading the articles and the follow-on comments, no one talks about basic principles or philosophical ideals. Seems most espouse narcissistic arrogance, situational ethics, and personal preferences. Protesters never seem overly bright to me. Emotional, yes. Activists seem to hold the brain trust. But, what’s the difference?
Basic principles include free speech and individual rights. Protesters I am seeing have no respect for either. Some activists do and others not so much.
In America, free speech is about speech in public places or places you own. The basic legal constraints and rights the US Constitution provide are a limit on what the government can do, or not do, to silence people.
There are no free speech rights that give an individual a right to be on anyone else’s property and make speeches, which makes it impossible to legally exercise free speech on another’s property without the owner’s permission. So, in RL protesters are limited to being on the sidewalks, public property.
At Graceful there is no public space. So, there is no legal place for anyone to exercise their free speech rights at Graceful. Being there to protest makes them law (ToS) breakers. Well, maybe not. The owner sort of gives them permission with a sign.
In protecting people, the government’s duty is to keep you safe from people wishing to harm you. So, theft, injury, vandalism, etc. Civil laws provide for recovery of damages. So, if someone does something that causes you physical or financial harm or loss, you can go to court, hold the person accountable, and recover your loss.
Standing in another person’s store and saying don’t buy, this person is a thief… breaks laws and ethical ideals. It should be obvious why I doubt the intelligence of protesters.
If someone doesn’t want Fat Chicks in their store, why do we get to inflict our values on that person? Where is the ideal that allows people to or a philosophy that suggests we force others to do what some group wants? Isn’t that fascism? Where is the freedom?
Does someone have to feel ashamed for there to be body shaming? If so, is it the act of shaming that causes the feeling of shame? If that is so, doesn’t that mean others have control over our feelings and we are only victims? Do you see where I am going?
If others do not control our feelings then are we responsible for our feelings? If we are, then aren’t we free from the control of others?
If a person takes control of their life, how is body shaming possible? Don’t we have to become, consider our self, a victim for it to even be possible?
Are the protests really about the real problem?
Are you thinking these things through?
Sortta disagree. Yes for free speech. No for being mean and hateful.