I’m a strong believer in rights, assuming they are defined properly (i.e., they don’t require trampling on the rights of others).
Unfortunately, many politicians assert people have “rights” that can only be fulfilled by exploiting others (usually taxpayers).
We now have lawmakers asserting that there are “rights” to housing, healthcare, jobs, and countless of other things that should be earned in the private sector rather than financed by other people.
Politicians love this game (at least until they run out of other people’s money).
But some politicians are more creative than others.
Today, we’re going to look at a somewhat unusual “right” that is being provided by Brazilian taxpayers.
Sushma Subramanian, in a column for the New York Times, explains there is a right to beauty in Brazil.
Brazil…prides itself on its huge number of skilled plastic surgeons. The country recognizes a right to beauty, which in practical terms means subsidizing nearly half a million surgeries each year… In the 1950s, a famed plastic surgeon convinced the president that ugliness can cause painful psychological suffering and that treatment should be covered. While at first he was referring to those with congenital deformities and burn victims, most procedures covered today are purely aesthetic. …In a public health system that’s strapped for resources, it’s certainly arguable that this is the wrong kind of spending. Everyday differences in bodies end up being pathologized by the medical establishment, defining attractiveness in a limiting way. Small breasts, for instance, might be diagnosed as hypotrophy of the mammary glands. …what Brazil’s policy creates is an acceptance that beauty is a form of self-care and that there’s nothing embarrassing about wanting to meet society’s standard for how we should look, no matter our social class.
Since I’ve written on the economics of “lookism,” I agree that physical appearance is important for people. Not just for their psychological well being, but also for their economic success.
But does that mean taxpayers should become involuntary participants in the process of beautification?
P.S. You probably won’t be surprised to learn that American taxpayers already are paying for cosmetic surgery. And Buffalo taxpayers are facing the same problem at the local level.
P.P.S. Here’s my list of other “great moments” in human rights.
- Academics in both America and Europe, as well as a committee from the Council of Europe, claim there is a right to other people’s money.
- Across Europe, a satellite dish is now a human right.
- The Department of Housing and Urban Development asserts there is a right to “emotional support animals” in college dorms.
- In Finland, broadband access is a basic right.
- In France, it is against the law to say your husband is under-endowed or that your wife is fat.
- There’s now an entitlement for free soccer broadcasts in Europe.
- In Italy, you have the right to…um…your testicles.
- Both the United Nations and the Obama Administration think there’s a right to taxpayer-financed birth control.
- In the United States, the elderly have the right to taxpayer-financed sex-change operations.
- There’s even a right to a “special accommodation” if you’re a pee-shy worker in America.
- In Scotland, there’s a right to feminine protection products.
