The problem you're describing is real and something that needs to be resolved.
I'm assuming six months ago you would have told someone to wear a mask because that's what science says. Now you're ignoring the science to make a statement. Was it lip-service and posturing 6 months ago or is it now? Do you value science or not?
You're telling the anti-mask/anti-vax people that yes it really was just bullshit and it was never really about science.
You’re absolutely right. Six months ago I would have said something like that (and indeed many months before even when the CDC was spewing the bullshit that started all this anti mask stuff). I probably wouldn’t have hassled someone I didn’t know, just avoided them altogether.
However, the difference is, by wearing a mask where it might not strictly be necessary, I am choosing to inconvenience myself in a way that does not harm another person in any way. Choosing not to wear a mask where it is necessary puts other people in danger, and risks the overall epidemiological health of the society around you (and in my jurisdiction was also illegal). That’s quite a big difference in my opinion.
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.
Equating basic precautionary measures with fear culture doesn't sound right. There's absolutely nothing inherently wrong with an individual deciding to wear a mask. I do agree that the tribalism that surrounds masks is ugly and harmful to society as a whole, but I'm fundamentally opposed to throwing away smart, simple solutions just because they're stained by politics.
You're being downvoted, but it's abundantly clear that at least some view masking as a moral or intellectual signal, and this "othering" is certain to have some impact, either personally or socially.
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.
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.
> 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 can't reasonably assert that one should or shouldn't.
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.
> This isn't a calculus I've thought through in depth, but the answer is almost certainly not "nobody."
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.
To me I read it as a physical representation of what is going on online. People assuming other peoples beliefs based on if they are wearing a mask. The striation would be people's biases towards people wearing mask and not wearing mask. Despite the actual health risk now/ in the future.
I read something about this in The Atlantic titled "The Liberals Who Can’t Quit Lockdown." Some people's identities have become tied up in this, so giving up their mask could feel like supporting Trump, sending the message that they don't care, or give up part of who they are.
That's GP's point. 6 months ago it made sense for everyone to wear masks. Today it doesn't. If someone today insists that everyone should still wear masks everywhere, then they're doing so for political reasons rather than scientific ones.
Oh, I see what you're saying. Yes, that's true at this point in time, but I don't think that's what anthonygd was arguing. They were complaining about the act of personally wearing a mask without a scientific basis.
It's probably late for you to see this but here's an attempt to clarify... my complaint is with wearing a mask as a statement _while_ complaining about the other side being overly aggressive in making their statement.
Essentially 6 months ago you somewhat had the moral high ground because science was on your side, but now it's just personal preference.
If you feel safer with a mask, that's fine (it might do some miniscule good). If you wear a mask to show everyone where you fall on the political spectrum, than just own up to the fact that you're being divisive.
You can call it "divisive", but the two actions are not equivalent.
In terms of merely making a statement, then the anti-mask option would be something like wearing a shirt or mask with a message about how this whole mask thing is stupid.
The objection to people going maskless 6 months ago is not that they were making a statement, it's that they were endangering people in aggregate.
When you say "Was it lip-service and posturing 6 months ago or is it now? Do you value science or not?", that would only be justified if the science was specifically saying not to wear a mask right now. But that isn't true and has never been true. Wearing an unnecessary mask has always been fine.
I don't think that necessarily follows. Someone who still thinks we should remain masked for a while longer might believe that we should continue to err on the side of caution, because we've seen infection spikes when restrictions are eased or lifted too quickly. The CDC's initial mask recommendation came later than it should have, so why is it so hard to believe that lifting that recommendation is coming too early?
Remember that, while the CDC is advised and informed by scientists, they are ultimately a public policy agency. The science matters, to be sure, but what matters most is that the best outcome is achieved, based on people's behavior.
I think they're recommending dropping mask requirements now not because it's the best science, but because vaccine demand has been dropping, and they believe that giving people real-world, day-to-day incentives to vaccinate will convince some of the people hesitant to get vaccinated. And I agree with them on that, and I think it's the right move, even if it carries some risk.
There are literally zero downsides to wearing a mask in public, and it's crazy that anyone would shame someone for it. In many Asian countries it is considered civilized and thoughtful to wear a mask when feeling ill to prevent the spread of disease. I too hope this becomes the norm in the US.
You don't think that the continual dehumanization of people into creatures with eyes, hair, and without emotions is a downside to wearing a mask in public? A smile as you hold the elevator door for someone goes unseen; all the other person gets is a withering stare from behind a sterile surgeon's mask. A joke that's good enough to make someone grin but not laugh is now a joke that falls flat on its face. An inappropriate remark that is met with a frown or pressed lips is now emboldened with apparent silence.
Yeah, I think there is some downside to never showing your nose and mouth. Especially when you think of them as more than breathing holes.
I think it should be 100% the wearer's choice whether they want to show the world their face or not. Saying 'thank you' to someone opening the door is just as good as a smile. Nobody 'owes' anyone else anything.
You were allowed to wear a veil before the pandemic as well, and no one is going to stop you now.
I adopted the Asian custom of wearing a surgical mask when feeling under the weather four years ago, for the record. Got a lot of weird looks on the BART, but also some supportive ones from, you guessed it, Asians.
Emphatically agreed. Particularly in our increasingly-polarized and dehumanized culture, smiles are worth saving. Masks definitely do have costs. Severe costs for children at school with new teachers/strangers.
You can easily tell whether someone is smiling or not underneath a mask, and I think most people have learned to "smile with their eyes" to make it even more obvious. It's not that big a deal.
At the start of all this, I saw someone point out that in Japan, where mask-wearing is more of a thing, their emoticon for smiling is ^_^ while in the US :) is used. One emphasizes the eyes, still visible with a mask on, the other the mouth. (Note: I am not an emoticon expert, let alone a cross-cultural one)
Given the number of women I've seen happy that no one has told them to smile during this pandemic, I guess a lot of folks in the US don't know how to tell when eyes are smiling.
I hope it's not. There's a lot of non-verbal communication we miss when wearing masks. It's not as bad as how tone can be hard to communicate on the internet, but it's still not as good as being able to read someone's facial expressions.
I really hope it was satire but I can’t tell anymore. If not, I guess now we add “dehumanization” to the list of horrible effects of wearing a little piece of cloth on your face. I really don’t get why so many people are willing to die on this particular silly hill.
I don't have super strong passions here. But reverting to fashion norms seems pretty appropriate, once it's safe. If it's not safe now, when would it be?
People do take a lot of cues from facial expressions and at least in "the West" we rarely wear face coverings. So there's definitely some (mild?) cost to wearing the mask, too.
I will say this, though -- organizations that insist on compelling others to wear masks outdoors are terribly misguided.
>organizations that insist on compelling others to wear masks outdoors
Which organizations might those be? State and local governments?
At least in the US, there are more than 50 states/territories, hundreds of cities and more than 3,000 counties. Each of which has separate authority for public health issues.
That said, many (perhaps most?) of those entities have been following the CDC guidelines. Those have now changed. As such. it seems likely that many of those 3,000+ entities will change their policy prescriptions.
> Which organizations might those be? State and local governments?
No, thankfully I think they're probably making mostly good recommendations there. I'm thinking of stuff like outdoor soccer - parents are asked to wear masks in a big open field with no crowds.
I think people are purposely under-emphasizing the amount of facial communication still possible with a mask on. Never mind that all these dehumanization scenarios conveniently assume people have somehow lost all ability to utter any sort of noise.
If someone wants to continue wearing a mask for a reason with no harmful externalities (e.g. allergies, privacy), respect their personal freedoms and let them.
There's also defogger you can apply that kind of works (I got it at a hockey store, marketted for the clear face masks some people wear instead of metal cages). An adjusted mask probably works better, but the defogger is better than without in situations where I know my glasses will fog up and I have to have a mask.
I knew when Apple released the iOS update that lets my Apple Watch unlock my phone when wearing a mask, that it would mean I would very soon not have to use it anymore. Some corollary of Murphy's Law.
Like what kind of mask? In heavy industry or manufacturing environments, I can assure you that nearly all are wearing N95s or surgical masks, and they all cause real issues with safety glasses fogging. It's been a huge problem, alleviated some with the Uvex wipes.
If I’m going to be in an enclosed space with lots of anti maskers for a longer period of time I use a 3M elastomer mask with replaceable p100 filters. It’s less comfortable though.
Also to be exceptionally clear, if you are wearing an N95 mask and it is fogging your glasses, it is NOT sealing properly. That condensation is coming from air that’s escaping out the top.
KN94 masks with ear loops are rather less effective as they can’t pull tight enough on the face to seal.
Some see downsides. There's a reason that in many places in the US it was illegal to wear a mask in public before COVID happened. Most of the time it is to prevent potential law breakers from being anonymous, I think. I don't support it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it comes back someday.
The point isn't whether you're willing to violate an extra law. It's that pre-COVID, if someone walked towards a bank wearing a mask, they're going to get noticed and attract attention well before they start committing their violent crime, increasing the chance that they're caught.
True, I guess maybe they were more to target groups who wore masks and were/are known for breaking laws. I think some were passed (and definitely at least proposed) to target antifa, and I believe some were also passed to target the KKK.
That is kind of like saying there is zero downsides to wearing a helmet or a bulletproof vest in public. It’s fine if you want to do it, but people not wanting to do it is also fine. The problem is both sides often have a degree of judgement that their way is better.
Andy Samberg has a hilarious song along these lines, called YOLO. [1] I’m surprised it hasn’t been referenced more during the pandemic, especially when multiple-masking has been discussed.
It is also a hilarious and catchy song in its own right.
Bulletproof vests and helmets are intended to only protect the wearer. Masks, on the other hand, are supposed to protect the wearer and the people surrounding them. It's not the same
The key part of your statement is "when feeling ill". They don't just wear them all the time though it may seem like that to outsiders (they tend to take "feeling ill" in the lightest respect possible).
You can't say zero because there is the low but still there possibility someone will fight you over and even end up shooting you because of the impending fight. It has happened. Again it's rare but it has happened, and I would say that the risk of an argument and physical altercation over it with Trumpian qultists will increase over time.
This is entirely based on where you live. There's places in the US where the vast majority never wore a mask, and going to the store without a mask was the more "normal" thing to do.
In those places you're almost sending more of a message by wearing a mask.
> * Right now, not doing so is a strong social signal that you’re a special kind of belligerent asshole that probably hasn’t been vaccinated, and wants to pick a fight... *
Man, I'm sorry, but you read like the belligerent one here, judging people from afar. I wear a mask when possible (and will also likely continue to do so, despite being fully vaccinated) but this self-righteous attitude I think is an enormous part of the cultural problem.
I have always tried to follow a blend of cautious common sense and the science here, so my policy throughout the pandemic has always been
- Always wear a mask when indoors (other than at home or in my car alone)
- Wear a mask outdoors when it's difficult to remain less than 10 (not even 6) feet from other people. If I need to pass someone on a sidewalk, or someone's approaching me at an intersection, I put my mask on. And I make sure to cover my nose. And even with the mask on, I will usually opt to go into the street or otherwise create distance.
Despite this, I have been shouted at by people more than 30 feet away across a street and from people driving cars(!) about walking outdoors without a mask at times, when nobody has been anywhere near me. I'm sorry but this is just asinine. There has to be some time when it's ok to not be wearing a mask when you're not at home. I wear glasses and am otherwise visually impaired (I have an autoimmune disease which inflames my retinas). When I wear a mask, it tends to fog my glasses and make my vision even worse, sometimes dangerously so (I've been nearly hit by bicycles riding on the sidewalks tens of times - you can't hear them coming when they decide to come up behind you on the sidewalk despite the presence of the perfectly good bike lane) If I wore a mask while driving my reduced vision would make me many many times more dangerous than an unvaccinated person not wearing a mask outdoors, and yet I see this behavior all the time - even when the driver is alone in their car!
Furthermore, one of the times I was shouted at, I actually had a painful cut on my face, and wearing the mask aggravated it. I still would wear the mask if I was in a store or actually anywhere near someone outdoors, but that didn't stop someone from berating me from across a four lane street!
I keep seeing these self-righteous claims throughout these threads that "there is no reason not to wear a mask". Frankly I think these folks are mentally lazy - I learned in my first philosophy course that it's dangerous to use any kind of universal quantifier in your reasoning. I also learned that it's better to show empathy if possible, or at least extend the benefit of the doubt, but for some reason this pandemic and the politics seem to have completely shut any nuance and / or compassion off.
On top of that, you admit further down in this thread that you would just choose not to engage someone you didn't know. I'm sorry, but that means that you shouldn't complain about them, then. It doesn't seem like you've given yourself any hope of arriving at a more charitable conclusion than "this person is a belligerent asshole".
Ugh. Apologies for the tone. I'm not anti-mask, but I think this stopped being about the masks a long time ago, and the fact that we can't seem to collectively recognize it is incredibly frustrating.
I think the belligerence comes from the fact that multiple people were killed during confrontations with anti-mask individuals.
I certainly sympathize with your experience. I behaved very similarly and got yelled at once or twice for not wearing a mask outside. But at no point was I worried that they were going to pull a gun on me. Meanwhile, people making close to minimum wage with minimal (if any) health benefits had to put up with the anti-mask zealots just so they could pay their rent and keep food on the table.
