New York City passes law barring weight discrimination
bbc.com
bbc.com
Sort of implies that they want special treatment for fat people as opposed to equality. Does this mean that seats all have to be designed for the biggest person possible?
In this fantasy world, as someone well above average height, I'm also discriminated against. With more basis in an immutable characteristic. Shouldn't I also get special tall person seating and whatever with extra space? Can I get a suv for the price of a compact car because I don't fit in one?
> The bill adds weight and height to that list, while including exceptions for jobs in which weight and height are a "bona fide occupational qualification" or where there is a public health and safety concern.
Edit: On a serious note, reading the below
> The measure is expected to be signed into law by New York's mayor later this month. The effort received widespread support, passing 44-5, despite scepticism in some quarters.
I wonder who are these people? There are all these insane policies that I imagine 90% of random people would obviously think are ridiculous. Tabloids regularly like to run the rage bait article of some overweight person complaining they can't fit into a seat. Even this article doesn't bother bringing up the obvious. The sole objection to this idea is:
> New York City council's minority leader, Joseph Borelli, who is a Republican, told the New York Times he was worried the law would empower New Yorkers "to sue anyone and everything".
> "I'm overweight but I'm not a victim. No-one should feel bad for me except my struggling shirt buttons," he said.
The only argument that they add is an obvious strawman. And they bring up that he's Republican, while none of the other politician's political parties are named. There could be numerous issues about enforcement, how it would relate to the ADA that has standards (e.g. wheelchair width). Are we going to have standardized obesity, like chairs have to support X pounds or doors have to be wide enough to fit a waist line of Y?
There are all these weird social equity issues that most major media stations just make up that there's some kind of consensus. This became clear to me in a CNN article that just had this line:
> It's not possible to know a person's gender identity at birth, and there is no consensus criteria for assigning sex at birth.
And the article was just a straight news about legislation relating to women's sports. They obviously got ridiculed and changed it the next day, but it just begs the question, what else are we being gaslit on? Who is writing these laws and why is there so much coordination and social engineering between these people and major news outlets?
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20210330233707/http://edition.cn...
> [T]here are a LOT more tall people than overweight people.
Just to put some numbers to the facts:
https://www.nyc.gov/site/doh/health/health-topics/obesity.pa...
> More than half of adult New Yorkers have overweight (34%) or obesity (22%).
Even if you're using a definition of "tall" meaning "taller than average" (50%), a larger percentage of the people are overweight in NYC.
There's no single threshold to say you're fat and you're thin. I'm sure cinemas could put big seats in for the overweight but at some point that 99.99% person is going to visit and be too big even for that.
Fat people are discriminated against, but the question is how much should obesity be catered for, and what range in body size?
Alcoholics and drug addicts and are also discriminated against by society, so shouldn't these lifestyle choices also be protected by the law?
I don't see why not.
Can I get a suv for the price of a compact car because I don't fit in one?
Can we think of more orthogonal issues to inflate here?