My Artifact for Tuesday is a new report by CNN that goes
into a current/ reoccurring issue of
airlines that are of recent, considering placing a tax on
people considered to be fat or overweight. The article explains that an
economist in Norway is cited saying that reducing as little as 1 extra kilo(a
little more than 2 pounds) of weight per flight, will save an airline company
as much as 3000 dollars a year. Because of this calculation, he proposes that
airlines should begin to charge overweight passengers an extra amount of money
or they must purchase two seats when planning to fly. This argument includes
that while we are paying for the extra weight of luggage, people have been
getting larger in size over the last 30 to 40 years. So more weight has been placed
on planes that was not a factored in years ago. Because the airline business
does depend greatly on weight management and fuel cost, from a business level
it would seem that this is a fine measure to take. For those who must pay a
heavier charge, it is a different matter. This situation is a form of fat
discrimination that is one of the few forms of discrimination that is still
publicly acceptable.
I chose this clip because many find that this proposed
"fat tax" is discriminatory and embarrassing to those
who can not control their weight, or are heavy for other reasons. A
stereotypical man would then have to pay more than a stereotypical woman. So can this be seen as a sexually biased
system? Those who are very much for the price by weight option are parents with
children. They can take into consideration that they will be able to pay less
for their children to fly because they weigh less than an adult. Other
questions arise, such as "Will the seats be the same size for overweight
and underweight people?" "Will bigger seats be installed?"
"What about people that are considered fit but are very tall?"
"How would price comparisons work?" So by enforcing this
proposed tax, many complications must be addressed.
This news report relates to the articles based on the
common themes of discrimination, invisibility of fat bodies in society and
shaming those who do not fit the cultural norms. While obesity is a growing
issue in the United States, taxing the overweight does not seem like an effect
measure to me. I feel that if there is an issue with people weighing more,
there should be a solution proposed rather than a tax. This is a tricky subject
because while we would like to encourage a healthier lifestyle for everyone,
there is the issue of free will and free choice. People do not want to be told
what to do and do not want to be told what to eat. By adding airline fees, it
could lead into a tax on other items like unhealthy food or a government tax
for health insurance if you are over a certain BMI. The list is endless. I cannot
say that I have a solution but I do
believe something has to be done in order to make our society a healthier one. From this clip it seems that if a person is obese they are not seen as a person but more as a number of pounds. Discrimination not only comes from the economy but also in personal lives. If an over weight person is not seen as a personal human, they can not be seen in a sexual sense either. But just because a person is larger, doesn't mean they can not be seen as a sexual being. With women, the sexual parts are actually enhanced and should be embraced in this sense. But instead, the body is seen as a thing rather than a person. This is an issue that must be addressed.
Questions:
1. What thoughts do you have on the
"fat tax," is it a discriminatory measure or is it a logical way
for the airlines to be more efficient?
2. Based on the articles and this
clip, how is media playing a part in our view of the fat man or fat woman? On TV and in news, how do we view people that are not a "normal" size?
3. In Hartley's article, Letting Ourselves Go, feminist
scholar Sandra Bartky says "Cultural expectations have shifted
away from what women are allowed to do
to what women are allowed to look like."
Considering this article and your own experiences, is this statement truth?
What do women gain by conforming to these socially accepted sizes? What do women lose if we do not conform?
4. In both articles, sexuality
comes into question. Why is it perceived that if a person is obese, they must
not be having sex and/or they are incapable of being sexual? Is there a
way to change this idea of asexual fat people? Would you also be surprised to see a pool full of large, scantly clad gay men like in the article "Fat. Hairy. Sexy."?
5. According to the CDC in 2009 to 2010, of adults
ages 20 and up, 35.9% are considered obese. The percentage of adults
20 years old and up who are overweight (but not obese) is 33.3 %. With this
data, are we affecting the majority of people rather than the minority now? And
if two thirds of the United States is overweight or obese, why is it that we
seem to find this body type "deviant" and "disgusting?"
Basically it is discriminatory because not only will it affect overweight people it will also affect people are are simply taller and may have a heavier set of bones. Or there is early pregnancy as well which of course discriminates soon to be mothers. But in the end simply giving an airport's customer based a chance at less cost of tickets based on their weight means that the airport can also take a hit if more overweight people discontinue their customer base and go elsewhere where the tax is not enforced. I just don't think this possible new tax will last, I just don't see the cost outweighing the gain of the proposal.
ReplyDeleteI think that there are many other ways that airplane companies can save money. For example, theres really no reason to offer so many types of beverages and food on an airplane, especially if the flight is under 3 hours. It's not like everyone is going to starve to death if they don't have a wide variety of chips. Also, think about how much money they would save if they chose not to put TVs in every seat. They could also charge people to have a TV in every seat. Obviously, as flyers we would prefer these things, but if airplane companies are so worried about their economic situation, I am sure they can find several other ways to save money, that aren't discriminating against a person's body type, which is sometimes uncontrollable, as we discussed in class.
ReplyDeleteThe airline industry is in a heavy recession, so such a measure is very likely to be considered by many of these companies. In a real sense, the discriminatory nature of such policies would likely come down to a court ruling, in which the court would have to determine whether weight as a discriminatory factor is valid or invalid, based on the ability for people to lose weight. I think it'd be interesting to see play out, however, I hope it doesn't come to that.
ReplyDelete