It's a trolley problem. Someone gets hurt if you put the mask on, someone gets hurt if you don't put the mask on. You're assuming that there is an objectively good decision here.
Furthermore, just as many warned in the early days of the lockdowns that extended lockdown may induce unhealthy behavior—which is evidenced in significantly higher suicide, mental illness, drug abuse, and so on—there are certain to be some undesirable side-effects of vaccinated mask wearing. What those would amount to is not known, but certainly deserves to be explored and expressed.
Why it has been left to the fringe skeptics to dive into these n-th order consequences—some real; some imagined—in the presence of the greatest minds of our times is, quite frankly, deeply disturbing.
It seems the world has transformed everyone into reactionaries, while it should be patently obvious that we should all strive to be rational in these complicated times.
This speaks very poorly for what we've built over millennia, and leaves the lessons of history to floresce in the corners while everyone goes to war with their chosen side.
Most places haven't yet seen increased suicide rates, and certainly not "significantly higher suicide".
The idea that wearing a mask is at the forefront of this issue is laughable.
Who gets hurt if social structure is affected by the apparent identity of masking? There are plenty of instances of catastrophic social division due to physical differences.
I think your choice should be your own, and based on health and other reasons. But it's pretty myopic to ignore the history of superficial social striations.
I'm having difficulty understanding what this comment is implying. Should other peoples' opinions and reactions to wearing a mask (or not wearing a mask) be a factor in one's own individual decision making?
I just answered parent's apparently rhetorical question, "Who gets hurt if I wear a mask?" Their assumption is, "Nobody," but the truth aligns more closely to, "Maybe somebody."
This isn't a calculus I've thought through in depth, but the answer is almost certainly not "nobody."
Edit: Please keep in mind this comment is made during a particularly divisive time in world history, so my answer reflects that context. I'm not being so pedantic as to suggest, "well every action may hurt somebody." Rather, the effects of the choice is uniquely amplified due to our current social strife.
That's fair; I don't doubt that there are isolated, contemporary examples where un-masking would have led to a better situational outcomes.
As far as if "public reaction" should factor into individual choice, my stance is more based in principle than practicality; bending to the will of popular opinion is a strategy that is highly stifling, due to the fickle and stochastic nature of group opinions. I think it's dangerous to suggest that there are any societal circumstances where everyone should just "side with the crowd." Superseding reason with groupthink rarely yields anything but disastrous outcomes, so I believe that if one can tolerate the ridicule and aggression, then they should stand by their principles.
Sure but the fault lies with society, not the individual with the differences (chosen, like masks, or not, like a physical characteristic).