kim peace.

Understanding the Role of Conflict and Body Image Identity

(Published in Things No One Will Tell Fat Girls)

 

Kim Peace, MSW

 

 

            Self-loathing at epidemic rates, is an alarming social problem today, especially pertaining to body image and self-perception. Tragically, this is strongly rooted in, and perpetuated by, mainstream society on a collective and individual basis. How did we get to this place? What are the underlying motives for creating a system of defined ‘beauties’ and ‘non-beauties?’ What causes a group or an individual, to discriminate against others and cause harm, simply for looking differently than they? Further, what phenomenon occurs within ourselves that allows us to accept another’s negative perception of us? These questions frame an interesting debate.  

           

            Consider, that on an individual basis, when one person looks at another person and identifies them as unworthy of acceptance, unattractive, less than intelligent, or as deserving of invisibility, etc. a significant disconnection occurs. Prejudice, hatred, and injurious judgment often results through this type of interaction.  This process allows for the dehumanization of another.  One individual, thus, claims power over another by labeling that person, creating a false sense of superiority, and distinguishing another’s difference as ‘less than.’  Social Darwinism, an evolutionary theory, describes the unwarranted justification of this privilege taken by some members of society. It is thought that natural selection based on biological traits is a viable measurement of “who is worthy” and “who is not worthy,” in our society.  

 

Social Darwinists postulate that because humans are a product of nature and conflict, only the strongest, most intelligent, most beautiful (by American ethnocentric ideology) are to be considered acceptable.  Any individual who does not seemingly fit this mold, is then viewed as destined to fail, and treated accordingly. Those individuals are defined as different, inherently inferior, and less deserving.  Unfortunately, over time, the recipient of such messaging may begin to accept this ideology, and feel unacceptable, adopting behaviors that perpetuate this internalized oppression in their lives.  One may begin to distrust themselves and their previous self-concept, and loathe themselves.  This, unknowingly, can fuel the power differential, and intensify the dehumanization of all involved.

 

            The underlying motives for perpetuating this type of interaction are multifaceted. Upon initial observation, one might consider that ignorance plays a major role in discrimination. The idea, “You are different than me,” may feel threatening to some. This lack of understanding seems to create fear. Specifically, fear of the unknown, fear of what outcomes may result from our differences. This fear creates a disconnection between individuals. This disconnection from one another can allow for a strong reaction, like psychological reactance. Reactance is the motivational state aroused when there is a perceived threat, and need to reestablish one’s own freedom. These threats to personal freedom motivate one to take action that helps them to regain a sense of control.  In essence, they may become verbally or physically violent towards another when fearing and/or rejecting another’s differences.  Justification for discrimination might include, “You are fat and lazy,”  “You contribute nothing to society,”  “You cost taxpayers money in healthcare,” “You are so skinny, you are weak,” in an attempt to ‘move away’ from the fear of difference and the discomfort it may have produced for this individual.  Attempts may be made to coerce the other person into conforming and changing to match the status quo.

 

            At this point, one is left with a choice to make.  Do I conform and try to change my body?  Should I laugh it off, and make fun of myself?  Cry myself to sleep?  Withdraw and feel numb? Battle the overwhelming fear that I might never belong?  These are often responses in trying to cope with the conflicts that come up over acceptance and body image identity.  What can one do in the face of rejection?  What are viable alternatives?

 

            It becomes important to find ways to stand for one’s own right to dignity and to speak out in defense of one’s own justice in the world:

 

            The first step proposed here is to recognize that conflict is inevitable.  To embrace conflict with the will to create liberation can be a very powerful move.  When we pursue personal freedom, we will inevitably be met with societal pushback based on what is deemed acceptable and what is not.  The acknowledgment of the role of conflict for potential change is vital.  

 

            Secondly, we have the opportunity to question the injustice or discrimination that is identified.  We can ask ourselves:  

 

• Do I/Can I, believe in the inherent value of each person, regardless of commonality or difference?  

• Can I respect others and myself for the individuals that we are?  

• Do we all have the right to be ourselves, be safe, and accepted?

 

If we are unsure, then we can seek the ideas of trusted others, and continue to question what society mandates.  Take your time.  Listen to other’s experiences and think carefully about your own.  What has been helpful for you, and what has been harmful?

 

            Third, if we find that there are hurtful beliefs that permeate our lives we can make a decision to refute them.  We can be brave, as we are ready to, and confront these ideas. Take one step at a time, and the reconstruction of truth begins.  We can rebuke comments or media messages we hear that are unrealistic, unjust, and harmful.  We can do this out loud in the moment of confrontation, or silently in our minds as we encounter them.  We can recruit our own ‘Board of Directors’ of trusted individuals (authors, helpful friends and family members) that can remind us of our worth and beauty, and that of others, when the world is working diligently to maintain the discriminative status quo.

 

            Fourth, if dialogue is possible with groups or individuals who are making harmful statements, it is a possibility to join with others and stand as an advocate and overtly challenge the destructive paradigms built into our society.  One might initiate conversations, write about, and/or lobby for changes that would further secure respect of diversity and reinforce the value found in the uniqueness of all.

           

            These four alternative approaches begin within the individual.  It purports that one starts by finding the power within to deconstruct negative systemic messaging and identify the injustice.   These four approaches remind us that we can reject oppression and dehumanization. We can secure our right to self-acceptance. This forward movement can usher in liberation and freedom.  By utilizing conflict as a catalyst for transformative work it can create the space for the beginning of loving oneself, and concurrently, loving others, while reconstructing a more just and healthy paradigm in our society.