BORIS JOHNSON: Why the human 勧める to 適合する that's made everyone (except me!) 溝へはまらせる／不時着する bobble hats for ski helmets makes me 恐れる for the legalisation of 補助装置d dying

• e-mail

Like some grizzled 退役軍人 of a 敗北・負かすd tribe, I gaze out from the ski 解除する in La Rosiere, フラン, and I think how 急速な／放蕩な the newcomers have 押し進めるd us aside.

These were our 母国s, these gorgeous 雪の降る，雪の多い 山腹s.

We 支配するd the アルプス山脈. We teemed on the pistes, as the Sioux and the Comanche once 命令（する）d the prairies.

We were the Soft Hat tribe, すぐに identified by the glory of our headgear.

Some of us had （土地などの）細長い一片s, some had bobbles, some had ear flaps. Some even had funny little bison horns or strange Mohican crests. But mostly we wore lovely, natural, woollen hats, 完全にする with picturesque icicles that formed when we sat on the 議長，司会を務める 解除するs.

Then （機の）カム the invaders. It must have been more than 15 years ago that I first became aware of the helmet-長，率いるs. I assumed they were 単に a curiosity, a passing fad.

Boris on the ski slopes in Champoluc, Italy, in 2012 wearing his woollen hat

I called them ‘Tadpoles’ and ‘Darth Vaders’. I inveighed in public against this strange contagion that 原因（となる）d スキーヤーs to sprout a 黒人／ボイコット, plastic second cranium.

Was it really necessary, I asked, to wear a ski helmet?

It seemed to me that helmets 減ずるd your general 認識／意識性 of you r surroundings. They made your 長，率いる harder and heavier (and bigger) and therefore more likely to 傷つける someone if you bumped into them. It wasn’t （疑いを）晴らす to me that they really gave you that much 保護.

What about poor old Michael Schumacher? The 決まり文句／製法 One エース was going no 速度(を上げる） at all when he had his life-changing 事故 at Meribel ― and he was wearing a helmet. Indeed, there are some who have argued that the GoPro camera on his helmet 現実に made his 傷害s worse.

So I always resisted the gentle suasion* of friends and family. I decided I was going to wear my bobble hat in all 条件s, in the whitest of hells on the blackest of runs.

I was going to have the joy of the elements, the 勝利，勝つd and sun on my helmetless 長，率いる, as the first British アルプス登山家s did.

In the years since then, I am afraid I have utterly and visibly lost the argument.

The helmet-長，率いるs have 勝利d. We woollen-最高の，を越すs have all but 消えるd from the slopes. I look 負かす／撃墜する from the 解除する on a glorious sunlit scene, with スキーヤーs all over the place like ants in a sugar bowl.

Helmets worn by スキーヤーs have become the norm in 最近の years on the slopes around the world

The Soft Hat Tribe are 負かす／撃墜する to one or two per cent (and having just been to Utah I can 証言する that it is the same in the freedom-loving U.S.).

Helmets, helmets everywhere, matt-黒人／ボイコット bonces ― as though skiing were now a 支店 of motorsport. I 嘆く／悼む the change; and yet I know that many readers will find my 態度 exasperating.

Oh come off it, you will say. It’s for your own good, mate. Think of your family. Think of the 苦しむing you would 原因（となる） if you brain yourself against a tree. Why should the taxpayer have to 支払う／賃金 for your rehab? Why put more 緊張する on the NHS?

It is, I 収容する／認める, a very powerful argument: that wearing a helmet not only 妨げるs your own 苦しむing. It is also socially responsible. That, I 嫌疑者，容疑者／疑う, is why the helmets have 急速な／放蕩な proliferated across the world.

Former hat-wearers suddenly feel they せねばならない wear them; and that if they don’t they will 現実に be letting 負かす／撃墜する everyone else: their family and friends, and the taxpayer.

Ski helmets were once thought of as special safety 装置s, reserved for those who were 特に 攻撃を受けやすい, like children. Then they became commonplace. Then they became the 支配する ― something that society decided was necessary; and that people should actua lly feel 有罪の for not wearing.

I want to 焦点（を合わせる） on this 過程 ― this movement from optional to 半分-compulsory ― because our society is about to 乗る，着手する on a change far more 深遠な and morally troubling than any ?決定／判定勝ち（する） about ski gear.

It is pretty （疑いを）晴らす that we are 長，率いるing, sooner or later, に向かって 法律制定 to 許す 補助装置d dying. The 投票s show big 大多数s in favour. It is already happening in Scotland.

Millions in the UK are 深く，強烈に and 本人自身で familiar with the agony of those whose 医療の 条件 is 終点, and who 簡単に want the dignity of dying on their own 条件. To many of us, the 客観的な in itself seems utterly humane, and 合理的な／理性的な: to minimise 苦しむing.

We also assume in this 審議 that the 手続き would be reserved for a 少数，小数派 of extreme and 悲劇の 事例／患者s, and that there is no chance that 補助装置d dying would become commonplace, let alone something people always felt they should at least consider.

But you know what ― that’s 正確に／まさに what I thought 15 years ago about the wearing of ski ?helmets. I assumed that they were just for a small 少数，小数派, for those who felt 特に 攻撃を受けやすい or nervous about skiing.

I never thought that everyone would feel morally 強いるd ― or even いじめ（る）d ― into wearing them. What worries me, therefore, about any 法律制定 on 補助装置d dying is that we could see the same 過程 of 早い normalisation. An 選択 that was at first thought to be sensible, but ーするつもりであるd only for exceptional 事例／患者s, could ?速く become more ありふれた.

It could finally get to the point where very large numbers feel the 圧力 to 落ちる in line, where ?el derly and 攻撃を受けやすい people ?定期的に decide that they do not want to be a 重荷（を負わせる） on their families and a 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金 on the 明言する／公表する.

They decide that 補助装置d dying is the responsible thing, the 権利 thing for themselves and their loved ones; and anyway, it is now what so many other people are doing.

It would be a nightmare.

Could it happen? Could we be 急落（する），激減（する）d into such a dystopia in which people feel invisibly 勧めるd ― by the example of others ― to take their own lives?

態度s can change. Social 圧力s can change. Look at our 混乱s about gender, which would have seemed baffling to an earlier 世代 and which have come upon us out of the blue.

Our approach to 安楽死 could also change, and very 急速な／放蕩な.

I am not 説 that 補助装置d dying is always wrong, any more than I am 説 that helmet-wearing is wrong or a bad idea: far from it. I am just making a point about social 圧力.

いつかs we can find ourselves doing something more or いっそう少なく blindly, because we want to be seen to be doing what is 権利, and because we are essentially ?conformist creatures.

The human race has 可決する・採択するd ski helmets partly because we ?個々に think they can 回避する our own 苦痛 (though the ?証拠 is pretty weak) but おもに because we have decided, as a group, that to wear a helmet is the socially responsible thing and 許容できる thing.

I have watched this psychological 軍隊 ― conformism ― from the 議長，司会を務める 解除する, over the past 15 years. It is a powerful and 早い 現象. In the 事例／患者 of ski helmets, it is also pretty 明白に benign.

History teaches us, however, that conformism is very far from always benign. If we are to draw up 法律制定 to 許す 補助装置d dying ― if we are really going to give everyone that 選択 ― then we must do everything we can to 確実にする that it is not a 手続き to which society becomes ?一般に habituated.

As we スキーヤーs so often discover, that is a slippery slope that leads to 災害.

Dictionary Corner

*Suasion: The 行為／法令／行動する of 影響（力）ing or advising someone, often by 控訴，上告ing to their sense of morality, instead of using 軍隊 or coercion