3 ms·

> The new law maintained the status of illegality for using or possessing any drug for personal use without authorization. However, the offense was changed from

> The new law maintained the status of illegality for using or possessing any drug for personal use without authorization. However, the offense was changed from a criminal one, with prison a possible punishment, to an administrative one if the amount possessed was no more than a ten-day supply of that substance. You seem to be mistaken about how their policy operates. You're also working from a different premise than me: I believe people fundamentally have agency, and so they're influenced by their circumstances, but their problems are not causal from them -- they made a choice to adopt that habit as a coping strategy. And frankly, I disagree with you about how to confront that: I think we should be accepting of how they got there, but I absolutely disagree with things like HAES which suggest that their choice isn't a problematic one. To borrow a phrase from a friend, and use it somewhat out of context: I can love a sinner without enabling or accepting the sin.

marricks 8y ago
Here’s what I don’t get about people from the “personal responsibility” camp: food companies spend billions of dollars on marketing research and ads to sell their products. The products they seem to be most easy at selling are any form of junk food. The easiest to target are the poor and people who don’t know better. I think they have a huge responsibility for unhealthiness and fat shaming doesn’t address that cause. Saying “oh people just need to make better choices” seems pretty shallow.
- NotAnEconomist 8y ago
  I'm confused by what you're confused by -- you seem to be attacking a strawman rather than anything I said. You're also confusing several issues: - There's no reason that people can't be responsible for their choices and it be unethical for junk food companies to do what they do. Your entire premise is hinged on that being the case. - I've never met a fat person that wasn't aware that junk food was bad. I'm sure they exist, but talking about the bulk of people, the 95% in the middle, they're aware that their diet impacts their health. They're simply choosing a self-destructive coping behavior of drugging themselves with food. I'm sympathetic to that, but I don't see any reason to pretend it's anything but what it is. Addiction and substance abuse, in a self-destructive behavior. - I don't believe that ads are causal, just influential. Again, they're making a choice to act this way, even in the presence of ads. What bothers me about people in your camp is that you treat other humans like some kind of animal you own, can decide what's best for, and manipulate or control. You refuse to accept them in their capacity as human persons, who have agency and the capacity to self-direct, then have the gall to turn around and talk about me being the shallow one.

marricks 8y ago

Here’s what I don’t get about people from the “personal responsibility” camp: food companies spend billions of dollars on marketing research and ads to sell their products. The products they seem to be most easy at selling are any form of junk food. The easiest to target are the poor and people who don’t know better. I think they have a huge responsibility for unhealthiness and fat shaming doesn’t address that cause. Saying “oh people just need to make better choices” seems pretty shallow.

NotAnEconomist 8y ago
I'm confused by what you're confused by -- you seem to be attacking a strawman rather than anything I said. You're also confusing several issues: - There's no reason that people can't be responsible for their choices and it be unethical for junk food companies to do what they do. Your entire premise is hinged on that being the case. - I've never met a fat person that wasn't aware that junk food was bad. I'm sure they exist, but talking about the bulk of people, the 95% in the middle, they're aware that their diet impacts their health. They're simply choosing a self-destructive coping behavior of drugging themselves with food. I'm sympathetic to that, but I don't see any reason to pretend it's anything but what it is. Addiction and substance abuse, in a self-destructive behavior. - I don't believe that ads are causal, just influential. Again, they're making a choice to act this way, even in the presence of ads. What bothers me about people in your camp is that you treat other humans like some kind of animal you own, can decide what's best for, and manipulate or control. You refuse to accept them in their capacity as human persons, who have agency and the capacity to self-direct, then have the gall to turn around and talk about me being the shallow one.