Whose rules?

You may have seen this on Facebook, especially if you get news feed from Miss Representation.  A blogger by the great moniker of Militant Baker wrote a letter to Mike Jeffries, the CEO of Abercrombie and Fitch, about her own campaign, "Attractive and Fat".  Accompanying the letter were photos of the militant baker herself and a gorgeous, Fitch-type model.

She writes that she had these pictures taken, not to prove that she has sex appeal worthy of attracting male models or to prove that she is photogenic (which she is) but for the express purpose to "challenge the separation of attractive and fat, and I assert that they are compatible regardless of what you believe."  MB is challenging Mr. Jeffries' attempt to make his own rules concerning the governing of his own company, because these rules of what is beautiful and what is not can be hurtful and damaging, especially to the self-image of the young.

However, in one of the fetching photos of MB, we can see the tattoos she has on her thighs, just above the knees: on her right leg, "My life"; on her left leg, "My rules".




Photography: Liora K Photography

I think it begs the question, which happens to plague the rest of society, whose rules win?  Militant Baker wants to live her life by her rules.  Ironically, this is how Mike Jeffries wants to run his company.  This how many folks wish they could live their lives but do not have the resources, thus, others are calling the shots, as in, the poor vs. the U.S. Congress, for example.

Our lives and the rules by which we live them affect countless other people, which seems to be the point MB is making to Mr. Jeffries.  My life is joined to your life and all lives by the actions and decisions I make, the attitudes and beliefs I hold.  This is why we make covenants, not only with God but also with each other--to hold the most important actions, decisions, attitudes and beliefs in common, because they affect the community as a whole.  For example, Abrahamic religions hold the ten commandments and the golden rule in common, the latter universal to most of the world's religions.

As a species, we have never really been able to afford the attitude of "My life, my rules".  There are times we've been able to inaugurate justice because of this battle cry:  Roe v. Wade, women's rights, privacy rights, etc.  But as it applies to individuals in general, we've had to mitigate its effects on society:  amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights.   Part of what makes this nation great is that we hold individual freedom and communal responsibility in tension.  Even though we seek 'to establish a more perfect union', we continue to suffer great losses of animal habitats, clean water and air, disease, extinction, violent weather patterns, the senseless deaths of women, men and children, culture, economic recession, bi-partisan entrenchment, and the greatest loss of all: compassion.

I applaud Militant Baker.  I am thankful that her rules include compassion for those who do not fit Mr. Jeffries' idea of attractive and that she is a highly vocal, visible rebel!  But isn't it time for a covenant that sounds something like "Our lives, our rules" and that we work on them both together?

By what authority do you live?