How much freedom should consumers have to decide which products and services they are allowed to buy? Opinions range from a private-property allow-everything perspective, to a comprehensive regulatory approach to consumer protection. Which is best? I prefer more freedom to less, with all that implies regarding personal responsibility for the consequences of my choices. Recent trends, though, seem geared toward narrowing consumer and producer choices, particularly in the area of how we manage our body fat.
If one could compel consumers to adopt the Golden Mean, it would eliminate extreme choices at both ends (too fat and too thin) of the body fat spectrum. But compelling virtuous behavior carries a price, in terms of loss of personal liberty.
Paul Rubens may have said it best. No, not the PeeWee Herman character (last name is spelled Reubens), the other one. The one with the paintbrush. The guy who painted lush, full-bodied women; often (they were) depicted in the nude.
Rubens’ fleshy ladies were a far cry from the modern high-fashion runway model, but perhaps pulchritude in volume is coming back in style. If so, double-digit sized women could breathe a sigh of relief. If recent decrees from the fashion world hold, the highly-sought models who have fulfilled designer demands for ever thinner female body standards will have to contend with a new fashion trend; anorexic-looking models are ‘out’ in some fashion centers.
But are we making contradictory health statements with regulatory trends? Just as New York City has outlawed trans-fats in the public diet, lawmakers in fashion-centric Milan (update: link expired) and other locations have banned stick-figure models. The recent death of supermodel Ana Carolina from complications of anorexia, not the only supermodel to literally starve herself to death, most certainly prodded the fashion industry to begin rethinking the body image it celebrates as ideal. Clearly, some market trends are neither appealing nor healthy. Anorexic thinness is both serious and visually disturbing, but it has been a standard in the appearance of many haute couture models for years. Equally disturbing, of course, is morbid obesity .
Besides creating a nightmare for marketers of food and dietary products, recent dietary and fashion bans are disturbing for another reason–the regulation of our personal lives through regulatory restriction of the options we will have an opportunity to consider.
We don’t know whether to hoard South Beach diet bars or Orvillle Reddenbacher Double-butter Movie popcorn; at any moment one or the other may be banned from future consumption. Ditto, perhaps, women’s clothes in size double- or triple-zero, to discourage the would-be anorexic?
Americans aren’t just consuming calories when they’re bingeing. Judging by the number of dollars, plans, products, and groups in the market devoted to weight loss, it’s clear that the issue of body size weighs heavily on the minds (and hearts, and other parts) of American consumers.
What happened to using common sense and moderation instead of regulation? Market options don’t determine which are the best, safest, or even most attractive choices for consumers. They simply offer alternatives, for better or for worse.
It’s no guarantee against regulatory encroachment, but responsible, moderate as opposed to self-destructive behavior gives regulators fewer excuses to limit consumer freedom. Moderation: it’s not the law, but it’s a good idea, and one consistent with preserving our economic and personal freedoms.