Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Egalitarianism vs Utilitarianism: Modeling

Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,070
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2015 2:17:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
In the modeling industry, we are now seeing more people advocating for the position that there should be more fat women in modeling. After all, skinny models may cause fat women (and more women than ever are overweight) to be depressed about their weight. It also may cause men to have unrealistic expectations of the body sizes of women, who are increasingly unable to live up to conventional standards of body size (to be fair, men are also getting fatter). And this demand that women be skinny has driven many women to starve themselves in order to lose weight. It isn't fair that this traditional standard is still demanded of people who are increasingly unable to live up to it. Egalitarianism.
However, most men would not find a fat woman as attractive as a skinny woman (not someone who looks like she has anorexia though). An industry filled with fat models would be, frankly, of lower quality than it used to be. I imagine that such magazines would get fewer consumers. Utilitarianism.

So what do you think? Which one should trump (hee hee hee I'm so clever) the other? Should society drop quality for the sake of fairness and preventing stuff like anorexia and bulimia?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2015 7:15:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/15/2015 2:17:23 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
In the modeling industry, we are now seeing more people advocating for the position that there should be more fat women in modeling. After all, skinny models may cause fat women (and more women than ever are overweight) to be depressed about their weight. It also may cause men to have unrealistic expectations of the body sizes of women, who are increasingly unable to live up to conventional standards of body size (to be fair, men are also getting fatter). And this demand that women be skinny has driven many women to starve themselves in order to lose weight. It isn't fair that this traditional standard is still demanded of people who are increasingly unable to live up to it. Egalitarianism.
However, most men would not find a fat woman as attractive as a skinny woman (not someone who looks like she has anorexia though). An industry filled with fat models would be, frankly, of lower quality than it used to be. I imagine that such magazines would get fewer consumers. Utilitarianism.

So what do you think? Which one should trump (hee hee hee I'm so clever) the other? Should society drop quality for the sake of fairness and preventing stuff like anorexia and bulimia?

Utilitarianism. A people happy is more important than total equality and "fairness." Besides, equality/fairness cannot ever be achieved.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 7:32:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Bump
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
kasmic
Posts: 1,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 8:00:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Utilitarianism. A people happy is more important than total equality and "fairness." Besides, equality/fairness cannot ever be achieved.

While I agree with your point here... how might a society organize its self in a way to maximize happiness without addressing inequality to some degree?

Can society be organized in such a way that maximizes happiness? Is that any more feasible that a society attempting to maximize equality.
"Liberalism Defined" http://www.debate.org...
"The Social Contract" http://www.debate.org...
"Intro to IR An Open Discussion" http://www.debate.org...

Check out my website, the Sensible Soapbox http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
My latest article: http://www.sensiblesoapbox.com...
pakicetus
Posts: 66
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 8:06:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/15/2015 7:15:42 PM, ColeTrain wrote:
Utilitarianism. A people happy is more important than total equality and "fairness." Besides, equality/fairness cannot ever be achieved.

Somewhat disagree. Effective fairness and equality can be achieved - not both simultaneously, though.

Aside from that, agree with your preference for utilitarianism.
SolonKR
Posts: 4,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 8:56:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Note: I'm framing this from the act utilitarianism perspective.

I don't see why utilitarianism has to be opposed to being more body-positive in modeling. We first need to examine what the point of modelling is; obviously, it's to entice people to buy a good or service. The concept of advertisement in a market economy is typically morally neutral, unless the advertised product is not already widely known, and has some tremendous benefit (eg the first iPhone). That's not typically the case; therefore, the morality of anything used to promote certain products or services can generally be reduced to the effects of inclusion of particular factors.

In this case, I would argue that body-positive advertisements, while perhaps negative for sales and the company (and this point is moot if it's a society-wide trend), benefit society through the reassurance provided to women. The benefits to mental health of women, as well as the degradation of rape culture, which is also immoral by utilitarianism's standards because of both the great harm to women and the great loss of potential innovation due to their marginalization in the workforce, among other things, are much better for society than the benefit of giving men excitement in their pants for a few seconds.

The only exception is the actual industry where lonely perverts buy issues of Maxim or Playboy or such. Since women don't usually buy those magazines or tune in to those kinds of shows, the utility is greatly increased by conforming to the traditional idea of beauty. Even then, though, you could make an argument that the existence and sale (or even just online presence) of such material is immoral because of the potentially negative social, emotional, and cultural consequences.
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2015 9:10:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/15/2015 2:17:23 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
In the modeling industry, we are now seeing more people advocating for the position that there should be more fat women in modeling. After all, skinny models may cause fat women (and more women than ever are overweight) to be depressed about their weight. It also may cause men to have unrealistic expectations of the body sizes of women, who are increasingly unable to live up to conventional standards of body size (to be fair, men are also getting fatter). And this demand that women be skinny has driven many women to starve themselves in order to lose weight. It isn't fair that this traditional standard is still demanded of people who are increasingly unable to live up to it. Egalitarianism.
However, most men would not find a fat woman as attractive as a skinny woman (not someone who looks like she has anorexia though). An industry filled with fat models would be, frankly, of lower quality than it used to be. I imagine that such magazines would get fewer consumers. Utilitarianism.

Utilitarianism is egalitarian. Arguably, favoring the former increases utility. So actually it's more like egalitarianism vs. inegalitarianism.

Anyway, I am undecided on this issue.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2015 3:05:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/27/2015 8:00:09 PM, kasmic wrote:
Utilitarianism. A people happy is more important than total equality and "fairness." Besides, equality/fairness cannot ever be achieved.

While I agree with your point here... how might a society organize its self in a way to maximize happiness without addressing inequality to some degree?

That would fall under utilitarianism, but wouldn't fulfill egalitarianism as the forefront value. Equality should be addressed, but not prioritized singularly above general utilitarianism. Does this help clarify?

Can society be organized in such a way that maximizes happiness?

I'd say one can. Although, obviously TOTAL maximization can't be achieved. Essentially, happiness comes through a variety of factors, including equality. Thusly, by addressing different areas, net happiness is *more* achievable than a specific item such as inequality, since the specifications would require it be met to a higher standard.

Is that any more feasible that a society attempting to maximize equality.

I'd say so. Equality is ONE facet out of many facets which play into happiness, so the targeted area is more specific and leaves out many other important factors.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW