Warning Against Air-brushing?

Although the realm of modern government in action seems to range from the proverbial sublime to the ridiculous, there are still items which catch the eye for their sheer nonsense quality. One such example has popped up in Australia. The leadership there is considering whether magazines which use airbrushed pictures of cover models and the like should contain an advisory that the bodies have been touched up to look better than they may in actual fact. Why? So that the impressionable among us will not feel quite so angst ridden at the sight of presumably better looking people.

What to say, what to say? Does this beg parody or merit a rant?

Let's rant. Why in the world would any government feel obliged to even comment on such trifles, let alone take them seriously? The whole non-issue reeks of the sort of idiocy wherein folks are shocked to find hot coffee hot, or when the report on education which came out a few years ago came back with the obvious conclusion that students who study more learn more. Which leads to the second relevant point about this: how many citizens in this day and age don't realize that photographs are cropped, touched up, and in probably a thousand other ways altered to meet an absurd standard? Isn't there at least a degree to which that if you allow your mental state to be affected by such tactics, you hold the blame for your demeanor? Do not sensible people realize as much?

This is government appearing to be working hard towards addressing a vital social issue when in fact it is not contributing to the betterment of society at all. It beats doing the true work of government such as actually protecting citizens and their real rights, though. All it really does is pander to the basest elements of humanity, most notably in this case vanity and jealousy. As to those whose self esteem are harmed by mere imagery, a smack to the back of the head would do them more good than any government regulation. Wake them from their stupor rather than treat it as a psychological condition.

Kate Ellis, the Australian Youth Minister (and subject of a future rant: governments need youth ministers?) claims that the move will empower consumers to seek greater choice in their purchases of beauty products. Sentiments like that, coming from a bureaucrat in all earnestness, speak volumes. When you institutionalize shallow feelings, you do indeed empower them. But is that what we want from those who are supposed to have our best interests in mind?