>>107989678you would never understand the horrors ive been through. you'd never know the discipline my body has been subjected to. there are no signs that show the exhausting negotiation between hunger & restraint, i'm so sorry for having a body that refuses to be rational.
this however, is not accidental at all. its the result of abuse throughout the years. unfortunately, ive been treating the appetite as something to govern. before i read kant, i already knew the gist of what i was getting into. restraint is virtuous, and control is proof of worth.
kant says, moral dignity comes from following reason rather than desire. desiring isn't wrong but it cannot be trusted to guide action. the moral subject must step back from inclination in order to act freely.
bulimia solidifies this idea. indulging becomes a moral mistake, purging is the corrective gesture and way to reclaim control over a body that refuses to be rational. what looks like a loss of control from the outside is shown as a desperate effort to restore it from the inside out.
so, yeah, i suppose i have created a fractured sense of self in myself. the body is both the one that wants and the one that judges. the one that fails and the one that punishes. kant warns against treating humanity merely as a means, yet bulimia turns the body into exactly that. a tool to manage guilt and to prove its worth.
but kants ideals struggle here. he assumes a will that can govern itself without coercion. bulimia shows how deeply that coercion can and will internalize itself. discipline is no longer internal but rather, it will come within. the lines between autonomy and compulsion blur together.
what ends up emerging is not a rejection of responsibility, but an extreme form of it. every bite every sensation every choice is weighed (no pun intended). the ethical life collapses inwards, concerned almost entirely with controlling the body.
eating disorders reveal a blind spot in moral philosophy, and they show that ethical life cant rely on reason or discipline alone. dignity cannot be earned by treating the body as something to dominate instead of inhabit.
kant's ethics are built on the idea that morality comes from autonomy, acting according to reason rather than desire. he assumes a rational subject who can step back from its tendencies, but bulimia challenges the limits of that assumption. it shows a subject who internalizes judgment so completely that reason becomes punishment. autonomy is not a liberating force in this, it's a form of constant hatred towards oneself in the name of a moral order.
in kantian (lol) the subject treats herself as a means to an end. contradicting kants philosophy which insists humanity must always be treated as an end in itself. but with bulimia the body becomes a site where morality is practiced, measured and enforced! this will attempts to keep dignity, but it does so by instrumentalizing the self, turning it into punishment.
kantian ethics, autonomy and reason are not always enough to secure dignity when the body itself feels like a failure.
using bulimia with kantian ethics doesnt make desiring wrong. it just shows the moral pressure the body and desires face. pursuing rational self control can fracture the self instead of supporting it. ethics is not just about following reason but about seeing the body, its vulnerability, and the way it teaches the limits of moral perfection.
when we ignore the body, striving for moral perfection can harm us
