Cheryl Tiegs Criticizes Sports Illustrated for Putting "Full Figure" Model Ashley Graham on Swimsuit Cover (firm, gyms)

[hodgemo2]

Originally Posted by skinsguy37

Except I'm not making that argument.





Here's what I am saying: BMI = weight over height squared. That is it. That is ALL you're going by. No fat %, no genetics considered, nothing else except for weight and height. And you're telling me it's better to stick with that than to really understand the actual health of a person? Sorry, but to me, that is a very narrow-minded approach to health and fitness. So is the approach that no matter what, if you're X height, X gender, X age, then you need to weigh X. Nothing else considered. And if you're over X, then you're going to die of a heart attack. Again, body shaming, scare tactics that almost nobody responds to positively.

If you enter her measurements into a body fat calculator, it suggests that her body fat percentage is 37.7% Anything over 32% is obese.

That being said, I think she has fairly nice proportions and is very beautiful. I personally think she would be even more beautiful if she dropped about 20 pounds and was in the size 8-12 range because you can visibly see fat and cellulite on her arms, back, shoulders, legs and butt. But she is lucky genetically in that she is a pear shape that trends towards hourglass, and has an ample cup size to distract from other excess.

But my point is....regardless of who finds her attractive. Regardless of whether or not she is beautiful. Regardless of even whether or not at the young age of 28 with no kids she can work out and be healthy. Her stats say that she is very overweight and inching into the obese category (if she is not already, and I think she is based on body fat %). Obesity has health consequences. I know that there are some cases of very heavy people having healthy numbers or working out a lot, but we all know that it isn't the norm. And having a waist size of 35 inches or more (yes, I KNOW that she doesn't) DOES increase your risk of diabetes 3-fold. Everything else being equal, that one number increases your risk by a factor of 3. So why are we glorifying it? Don't shame them, but don't hold them up as an ideal. Don't claim that they are the only "real" women.

I don't know why we all can't love the skin we are in, but try to become the best possible version of ourselves that we can be.

[Salmonburgher]

Originally Posted by elvira310

Are fat people monsters? Or are they people?

Read more carefully, please. I did not say that fat people are monsters. At all.

Originally Posted by elvira310

What does a fat person owe you?

You should be asking what do I owe to a person who chooses to be fat to the point that they become a drag on our economy.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Do they exist to be pleasing to your eyes?

Why would you ask that? I've posted nothing that could reasonably lead you to believe that I believe that.

Originally Posted by elvira310

I know I ask a lot when I ask you to read a past article and quote that I linked to, but I remind you again of the "Cracked" article that I quoted a little while ago.

I'll be happy to read the words that you post (and I'll thank you to do the same when responding to me). But, I'm not interested in reading articles linked to online. There is a whole world of crazy out there. I'm not interested.

Originally Posted by elvira310

It says that there is anger against women who are unattractive (ugly) and that is because men were raised to believe that there was a "social contract" which made women obligated to be pretty. When she's not, she's not doing her job.

Not relevant to me.

Originally Posted by elvira310

I know we're not talking about fat women only, but this is a fashion model who happens to be a woman, so...

Yes? So?

Originally Posted by elvira310

Do you honestly think that it is mentally healthy for a fat woman to be told that she shouldn't be ONLY thinking of her own well-being, but that she is obligated to lose weight because it's her "job"? That's the message that many women have been given their whole lives. They owe it to others to lose weight. Not for their own sake, but for others. They OWE it.

I have not made that argument. I have stated that if we are to be taxed to support other people, then from a social ethics perspective, we owe it to everyone in our community to make healthy decisions. I've stated explicitly that as far as the fat model in question goes, she likely has the economic resources to be responsible for herself and the consequences of her choices. But, many, MANY overweight and obese people do not have the same resources at hand. It is socially irresponsible to make choices and indulge in behaviour that have negative consequences that are beyond a person's capacity to deal with and thus place that person in reliance of others.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Do you imagine that perhaps this can build up resentment, depression, feelings of worthlessness?

Perhaps. But, such would likely be irrational.

Originally Posted by elvira310

What in the hell, we can separate the behavior with the looks, can't we? We do it with a lot of other things.

I'm not worried about looks. I'm concerned with fat.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Is a person who practices unprotected sex, is he or she UGLY? Do they walk down the street constantly hated, just for who they are or for how they look?

Is the smoker ugly, just for who they are, not for the activity of smoking?

I don't care how such people look. I do care that such people are socially irresponsible.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Like this picture: Would society view this photo of a smoker as hideous and they're groan and turn their head away? Really?

If that is the picture of the pretty woman smoking, no, most would not likely regard her as hideous. Nonetheless, I am just as opposed to that picture, as it glamorises smoking, as I am opposed to the idea of making fat people somehow glamorous, when we now know that obesity is more dangerous and costly than cigarette smoking.

Are you following me?

Originally Posted by elvira310

A fat person carries their "sin" with them wherever they go. The minute a person casts their eyes on a fat person, they judge them.

Don't speak for everyone.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Generally we can't know just by looking who had unprotected sex and hate them at first glance. Unless we smell a smoker, or they're lighting up in front of us, we can't know and hate them on sight.

I don't hate anyone.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Nothing can be established as fact if it's in the realm of personal opinion.

Er... Yes. But, a personal opinion based logically on true and objective facts is a strong opinion.

Originally Posted by elvira310

But what you want is for NOBODY to have the opinion that it is beautiful.

No. I've already stated the opposite.

Originally Posted by elvira310

This woman cannot and should not be glamorized or considered beautiful.

I've stated the opposite at least twice.

Originally Posted by elvira310

She shouldn't be on a magazine cover and viewed as beautiful by anybody—that's what you want.

No. That is not what I want. I don't care if people find her beautiful or sexy. That is subjective taste/preference and I have no opinion on that.

My opinion is that we have a measured problem with an obese and overweight population, and whether one subjectively finds fat attractive or sexy, the objective fact is that fat is not healthy, and thus, we should not glamorise fat or encourage acceptance of fat.

I realise that this is somewhat nuanced (not actually, I believe my opinion is quite clear). But, you ought to be able to understand my clear statements posted here. I'm not sure why you have several times now mis-stated my position?

Originally Posted by elvira310

Obviously enough are, that fat shaming is a 'thing.' Oh, that's right. You don't think it is that big of a thing, so therefore it isn't—for anybody. Because if you aren't aware of it, then it simply does not exist?

Er... Did I not reply to you above in this thread that I did Google "fat shaming" and I did I not state that I find it all odd?

Originally Posted by elvira310

That's easy for you to say, when you don't even know ... how it feels to those they're doing it to.

Well, I do know what damage fat people are doing to themselves and to society. That's all I am talking about.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Actually, there is bigotry against fat people that extends to more than just some nutjobs saying mean things on the Internet. The link I gave about fat shaming touched upon that. But I assume you didn't read it, so . . .

Well, you're apparently not even reading my words posted here, so, you'll forgive me if I am not interested in reading about crazy people.

Yes, there is bigotry against everyone by some. Life is difficult. Yet, obesity is not a problem everywhere, and it wasn't a problem in the US 40 years ago.

I'll not shame, but, I'll not be an enabler, either.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Why do you care if a fat person is "allowed" to think of themselves as beautiful?

I don't care. Why would you think that I do?

Originally Posted by elvira310

If they manage to do that while simultaneously working to lose weight, what's it to you if they feel that way?

I don't feel that way. You're just making stuff up.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Look, my whole premise here is to allow them to feel beautiful WHILE working to improve their health, not INSTEAD of improving their health. And yet still you're complaining about it. What in the hell.

The problem is expanding, not shrinking. I don't care at all how people feel about themselves.

Originally Posted by elvira310

"Acceptance" and "glamorizing" can mean different things.

I have not asserted that these words mean the same thing.

Originally Posted by elvira310

If it's a way for someone to feel like they can step outside wearing a bathing suit or shorts so they can take a walk or get some exercise (as part of their effort to live a more active, healthier lifestyle) then what's the problem? It seems like it bothers you greatly that these fatties aren't wearing sackcloth and ashes while they are fat, but instead are "allowed" to feel attractive as they are. Even when I say that it could be possible for them to simultaneously feel beautiful AND make an effort to lose weight, you seem almost annoyed and begrudging at the thought. Why?

Because I have a very difficult time imagining that either glamorising or accepting fat will lead to more fat people actively striving to get fit and instead will have the opposite effect. The statistics support my suspicion.

Originally Posted by elvira310

Is it going to be applied to all people who engage in behaviors that could cost more money? High risk sports, unprotected sex?

Absolutely!

[Salmonburgher]

Originally Posted by CrownVic95

No one has to accept anything but the fundamental rights of others to life and liberty. Give it a rest.

Does one have the fundamental right to engage freely in unhealthy activities and then force others to pay for the consequences of one's unhealthy actions?

Are you unaware of the notion that your freedom to swing your fists ends at my nose?

Give it a rest? I don't think so.

[Senah]

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

Do we have an issue with weight? I think we do. I think the insanely processed foods, what the FDA allows to pass as safe, a growingly sedentary culture, video games replacing actual sports, hypersensitive parenting (kids not allowed to play outside) and a whole mess of other factors combine to create this issue. But I balk at lamenting this issue (without offering any real solutions) or reacting to it by treating people deemed over society's ideal like second class citizens. There is a certain baseline amount of dignity a person deserves simply for being a person. Now he or she may develop into a person undeserving of said dignity based on his/her actions. Simply being overweight does not meet that criteria.

I won't disagree with you about some of the things you are suggesting as issues, but I also think normalizing abnormal behavior and body image is dangerous. And in terms of trends, I do think one thing people don't pay attention to is that you can watch the BMIs rise from the 1980s in concert with the heart disease, heart failure, diabetes prevalence, and heart attacks. We also have the studies to show causality so I don't say this willy-nilly. In countries with lower BMI you don't see these problems being major killers, yet when they industrialize and start to have increasing BMIs (as in some Middle-Eastern countries and urban areas of places like Nigeria), you start to see likewise rises in these morbidity and mortality trends. I just think it is too big to ignore.

[iknowftbll]

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

No. Not at all. To disagree with objective scientific and economic facts is odd.

To disagree with objective scientific and economic facts is odd. I just happen to be using those facts as support for my opinion.

That makes my opinion a rather solid one. You know how that works, right? Base your opinion logically on proven and objective scientific and economic facts, and you have a quality opinion.

In contrast, if you base your opinion on nothing more than feelings, or worse, on incorrect facts, then your opinion is likely to be illogical and, very likely, to be one of low quality.

I'm guessing you didn't read what I said. While I acknowledge the weight issue is a growing one, I challenge the extent to which it has been stated because the data feeding those "scientific facts" you cherish so much is inherently flawed for reasons I've outlined. You can cling to your argument all you want but until you give a solid counter argument to the critiques I've given on the data you just appear obtuse. And egotistical.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

But, I did indeed implicitly address your comments. I explicitly dismissed them and stated that I was basing my opinion on objective and proven scientific and economic facts and on sober (that part could be understood even if I didn't state it in so many words) observation.

How do we overstate an issue which is costs billions of US$$$ to our economy and affects millions of individuals with personal health problems?

I regard that as a fairly substantial and significant problem/issue, which is difficult to overstate!

In what way is having an opinion well-backed and clearly-supported by proven facts egotistical?

You really didn't address my argument you just restated your own. Which is really all you've done throughout this thread. You're a one-trick pony.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

In what world of logic is informing people of the social economic costs and personal individual effects of fat in any way equal to treating people without the dignity that they may deserve as human beings (not all people deserve or possess dignity, be they fat or thin).

I think you are raising a straw man, and I don't really understand why you would do so...

If you think that's a straw man then you don't know what a straw man is. I'm sure they have some quality community colleges over there in Asia. Maybe you can take a philosophy class.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

I'm not interested in shaming anyone. But, you do raise an interesting question.

Did we shame smokers? Are smokers still permitted to smoke on airplanes, in restaurants, hospitals, etc...? Do we shame parents (and pregnant mothers) who expose their children to preventable and unreasonable risks? Do we shame people who drink and drive?

You may not be interested in shaming anyone but plenty of people are. Deny it all you want; it won't change reality. As for shaming all those other groups, it's the difference between shaming behavioral habits and physical characteristics. And while I recognize some people's characteristics are a result of behavioral habits there is a big difference. As Elvira pointed out, the overweight person wears their "sin" on their sleeve. If you're in the grocery store behind the guy who has had a DUI you wouldn't know it just by looking at him. You wouldn't think to look into his cart and judge him based on his choices, even if he's got a couple cases of beer. But an overweight person...different ballgame. People do judge. And sometimes they publicly shame. And this is no straw man. I've witnessed it a few times, most recently about 2 months ago when an overweight woman (dressed as though she was coming home from a professional setting and very well put together) put a carton of ice cream in her shopping cart. Another woman not far away made a face at her and said, "Do you really need that?" Deny it all you want; people are openly nasty to overweight people. No amount of you denying that will change it.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

If what were easy? Changing minds? Of course that is not easy. But, we don't need to encourage unhealthy habits, either, do we? We don't need to make fat normal, or glamorise fat, do we? Because those efforts are in fact efforts to change minds. And you are not in favour of forcing people to change their minds, right?

If it's not easy maybe you shouldn't say it is. See how that works?

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

1. I don't hate fat. I hate the sin, not the sinner!

2. It most definitely is as simple as eat less and exercise more, and we should not pretend that it is more complicated than that. I'm not saying that it isn't easier to be fat than it is to get and remain thin. But, let's not pretend that the solution is some unattainable mystery.

One a macro level, yes, it is that simple. But when we are talking large groups of people that one-size-fits-all approach is pretty brainless. People are too dynamic to fit into that simplistic a formula. When you get down to a case-by-case analysis you literally have to approach every person individually. You have to understand them as an individual. I realize this is hard because it involves throwing some real critical thinking at the problem and it's just a lot easier to say, "eat less, move more" but if you're not going to take the hard road, maybe it's better you just keep quiet and not pollute the airways with uninformed opinions about how easy something is. An empty bag is better than one filled with dog ____.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

Oh, come on.

Oh, come on. Don't make irrelevant statements. You couldn't possibly know what or how much I know about fitness and nutrition. Thus, there is no point in trying to compare/contrast my knowledge with that of your wife.

You're right: I don't know you or what you know. My statement isn't one of assuming anything about you rather than being confident that whatever your knowledge base is it is not as informed as my wife's. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm confident I'm not.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

Anyway, Vince Lombardi once remarked about football that it isn't really a complicated game. The team that blocks and tackles the best almost always wins. Losing weight may be a difficult prospect for many. But, we know how to do so. Its a simple mathematical formula.

See above. It's simple at the macro level, very complex at the micro level. I think anyone can succeed at losing weight. But one standard formula isn't going to work for everyone.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

Again, this is irrelevant. You know nothing of me, so, any attempt at such comparison/contrast is meaningless.

It sounds like you feel threatened by my confidence in this claim. Just like you seem to feel threatened by a fat person having confidence in her appearance. If it's irrelevant why take the time to tell me it's irrelevant?

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

As a society, we were not nearly as fat 40 years ago as we are now.

People don't like to hear it, but, in the vast majority of cases, losing weight and keeping it off comes down to making and sticking to healthy lifestyle choices.

I agree. This process is not as easy as it sounds for a lot of people. In fact, your wording is significant because you said "lifestyle choices." For many, losing weight and keeping it off requires a complete lifestyle overhaul. Let that sink in. Have you ever had to do that in your adult life? Have you ever had to entirely re-invent the way you do literally everything in your life? I'm guessing at your age (did you say you are in your 50s?) you have made some changes in your life over time. But have you ever had to completely overhaul your lifestyle? If not, maybe a little compassion for someone who has had to do so is better serving than being judgmental.

I didn't tell you yet how the example I witness in the grocery store ended. The overweight woman just shook her head and said, "My life my decision." The snotty woman wandered off. By chance I made eye contact with the overweight woman and in an attempt to lighten her mood made a comment about her choice of flavor. It was a dumb comment but it worked. She gave a frustrated smile and said, "In the last year I've lost almost 60 pounds. I'm not done but it's been a long week and I just want to treat myself tonight."

So this woman was well on her way to improving herself and just wanted one Friday night indulgence and couldn't even get that without being judged by someone else. And many don't see a problem with this. And that's because they don't understand the problem on an individual level. And that's because they lack the will or ability to apply critical thinking to this issue.

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

Yes. I absolutely agree.

Well, I don't care what choices people make, so long as their personal choices do not affect me. People should be free to the greatest extent possible. But, that only works, really, when they also shoulder absolute responsibility for the consequences of their choice. Too many people do not do that in the US.

1. I don't limit my criticisms or observations to fat people. I am critical of anyone who engages in unhealthy activities without being responsible for the consequences of the same.

2. When an individual makes a choice to engage in an unhealthy act or live an unhealthy lifestyle, and that individual's resultant problems become mine and others' responsibility, then why should I worry about respecting said irresponsible person's selfish choice and behaviour? What personal worth and dignity does one possess when he/she chooses to harm his/herself and become a burden to society?

Again, the degree to which weight issues get blamed for rising health costs is disproportionate. This seems to be your gripe and is a standard, tired old re-tread for why people should be able to shame others. We do seem to be moving further and further away from personal responsibility in this country and I find that alarming. There are plenty of overweight people who refuse to acknowledge their own role in their situation and until they do they'll never make the changes they need to make. But again: the degree to which this actually affects you or anyone else...pretty small. I can at least appreciate someone who can be blunt and say, "I just don't like fatties" instead of hiding behind the health and collective liability arguments. I may wish that person had more tact, but I can at least appreciate the honesty.

[Meyerland]

Originally Posted by hodgemo2

If you enter her measurements into a body fat calculator, it suggests that her body fat percentage is 37.7% Anything over 32% is obese.

That being said, I think she has fairly nice proportions and is very beautiful. I personally think she would be even more beautiful if she dropped about 20 pounds and was in the size 8-12 range because you can visibly see fat and cellulite on her arms, back, shoulders, legs and butt. But she is lucky genetically in that she is a pear shape that trends towards hourglass, and has an ample cup size to distract from other excess.

But my point is....regardless of who finds her attractive. Regardless of whether or not she is beautiful. Regardless of even whether or not at the young age of 28 with no kids she can work out and be healthy. Her stats say that she is very overweight and inching into the obese category (if she is not already, and I think she is based on body fat %). Obesity has health consequences. I know that there are some cases of very heavy people having healthy numbers or working out a lot, but we all know that it isn't the norm. And having a waist size of 35 inches or more (yes, I KNOW that she doesn't) DOES increase your risk of diabetes 3-fold. Everything else being equal, that one number increases your risk by a factor of 3. So why are we glorifying it? Don't shame them, but don't hold them up as an ideal. Don't claim that they are the only "real" women.

I don't know why we all can't love the skin we are in, but try to become the best possible version of ourselves that we can be.

Which body fat calculator did you use? What weight and measurements did you use? Just curious.

[iknowftbll]

Originally Posted by Senah

I won't disagree with you about some of the things you are suggesting as issues, but I also think normalizing abnormal behavior and body image is dangerous. And in terms of trends, I do think one thing people don't pay attention to is that you can watch the BMIs rise from the 1980s in concert with the heart disease, heart failure, diabetes prevalence, and heart attacks. We also have the studies to show causality so I don't say this willy-nilly. In countries with lower BMI you don't see these problems being major killers, yet when they industrialize and start to have increasing BMIs (as in some Middle-Eastern countries and urban areas of places like Nigeria), you start to see likewise rises in these morbidity and mortality trends. I just think it is too big to ignore.

I think we're close on the causality. Industrialization often leads to a more sedentary culture because machines replace manual labor. Additives in foods ensure quantity but destroy quality. In the U.S. there are still a lot of jobs that require manual labor and that is a product of sheer size (we're over 330 million people and the world's second largest economy behind China who only recently passed us up). But for the most part physical activity here has been relegated to a recreational role. We all have different interests so not everyone is going to be interested in hiking, kayaking, playing ball, landscaping as a hobby, lifting weights and on and on it goes. I swear if we could convince more kids to put down the xbox controller and pick up an actual football or baseball glove we could put a major dent in this trend in a single generation.

[elvira310]

Originally Posted by Salmonburgher

Read more carefully, please. I did not say that fat people are monsters. At all.

Read more carefully please. That was what I was saying in the first place. That fat people are NOT monsters. You responded with someting unrelated to that.

I'll be happy to read the words that you post (and I'll thank you to do the same when responding to me). But, I'm not interested in reading articles linked to online. There is a whole world of crazy out there. I'm not interested.

Right. So you're not going to research anything further . . .

It is socially irresponsible to make choices and indulge in behaviour that have negative consequences that are beyond a person's capacity to deal with and thus place that person in reliance of others.

You completely missed the point I'm trying to make. I'm not suggesting that fat people should be encouraged to continue being fat. I'm saying that right now many fat people are not told that they should work to improve their health for their own sake—they're being told that they should lose weight because they're not beautiful enough. Well, I'll not repeat the article again.

Basically people need to want to lose weight, not because losing weight will make them more beautiful, which as a result will make them more visually pleasing to society, but because they will feel better and have more active, comfortable lives.

Perhaps. But, such would likely be irrational.

I don't care how such people look. I do care that such people are socially irresponsible.

You're not getting it. (Why am I surprised.) A smoker walks down the street, they are not glared at or judged or hated for "being a smoker." They actually have to be in the process of smoking to be glared at or shamed.

A fat person is glared at and shamed by many, by walking down the street. Even if the fat person is in the process of dieting and have already lost weight, it doesn't matter. They are glared at and judged anyway. They aren't actually doing anything "wrong," they no longer deserve to be judged, but it makes no difference. They will be "punished" anyway by many who just look at them.

If that is the picture of the pretty woman smoking, no, most would not likely regard her as hideous. Nonetheless, I am just as opposed to that picture, as it glamorises smoking,

So what would you have done? Ban all movies which have people smoking in them?

Are you following me?

People are able to watch movies with smoking in them, without all wanting to smoke. Somehow we've managed to still have these movies and watch them while disconnecting the smoking with the person.

I'm not suggesting that we MAKE everyone view fat as glamorous. I don't think that's necessary. I know it wouldn't work anyway. Too many people simply don't find it attractive or something they desire to be. I can think Ingrid Bergman is beautiful as she is, without wanting to have a cigarette dangling from my mouth.

Er... Yes. But, a personal opinion based logically on true and objective facts is a strong opinion.

You do realize that you can't decide for other people what they do and don't find beautiful, don't you? And no amount of "strong opinion" and "logic" will make any difference.

A woman's beauty can be separate from her BMI and health. Just like Ingrid Bergman puffing on a cigarette will still be beautiful, despite the cigarette.

My opinion is that we have a measured problem with an obese and overweight population, and whether one subjectively finds fat attractive or sexy, the objective fact is that fat is not healthy, and thus, we should not glamorise fat or encourage acceptance of fat.

I am not in disagreement, that we should not encourage fat, nor should we "accept" it, as in say that it is good and normal and there is no reason for alarm.

But as I said, acceptance takes on many meanings.

Er... Did I not reply to you above in this thread that I did Google "fat shaming" and I did I not state that I find it all odd?

But you diminish its impact on the individual.

Well, you're apparently not even reading my words posted here, so, you'll forgive me if I am not interested in reading about crazy people.

I was responding to this comment you wrote: "Its not like those morons are the people deciding on college/uni admissions or employment decisions."

All sorts of discrimination can occur. Including with employment. Nearly half of employers 'unlikely' to hire overweight workers - Telegraph (Though of course I realize that you won't click on that link. )

I don't feel that way. You're just making stuff up.

So why are we having this argument at all? It seems to me that you don't approve of seeing the beautiful model on a magazine cover, because it allows fat people to view themselves as beautiful. Is this correct or not?

I don't care at all how people feel about themselves.

Well, many studies tell us that how they feel about themselves may help them lose weight. Since you care so much that fat people are fat, it seems like you should care how they feel, if feeling a certain way could help them lose weight.

Because I have a very difficult time imagining that either glamorising or accepting fat will lead to more fat people actively striving to get fit and instead will have the opposite effect. The statistics support my suspicion.

Best Weight Loss Results Come From Fat Acceptance
There's different kinds of acceptance. There's no reason why a person can't love their body, even feel that it is beautiful, and still want to lose weight. Heaven forbid you read the article, I know. But there are a lot of similar articles out there, which tell us that "acceptance," meaning liking themselves they way they are now, can mean positive changes down the road.

To give an example (heaven help me, I'm going to waste my time again ), a girl is a size 26. She sees a beautiful size 22 model and aspires to be that size because it's an improvement over size 26 and a size 22 is "allowed" to be beautiful. She sees beautiful size 22s in magazines. She gets to a size 22 and sees a beautiful size 16 model and she aspires to be that size, because a size 16 is "allowed" to be beautiful too. If she's being taught about the reasons for losing weight, for the sake of her health, she can feel beautiful and happy all the way down the scale, instead of only at the lower end of the scale.

The way it's always been up to now is that a girl who is size 26 is told and shown constantly that anything bigger than a size 6 is ugly and fat and she should be ashamed and unhappy with herself if she's any size above that. The jump from a size 26 to a size 6 seems almost impossible. The jump from 26 to 22 and then from 22 to 16 (and then down from there) seems far less difficult, especially if she's feeling good about herself all the way there.

[Salmonburgher]

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

I'm guessing you didn't read what I said. While I acknowledge the weight issue is a growing one, I challenge the extent to which it has been stated because the data feeding those "scientific facts" you cherish so much is inherently flawed for reasons I've outlined.

You shouldn't guess.

There are statistics on the cost and consequences of fat.

I don't care about what you believe. The fact is, Americans are the fattest people in the world (unless we've been exceeded by the Brits or Aussies or Mexicans).

The fact is, we are fatter now than we were 40 years ago.

You acknowledge that the overweight and obesity issue is growing, but, challenge the extent?

But, its a problem, for all of the health and economic reasons stated. But, you believe it is overstated.

When will it truly become a problem, in your mind?

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

You really didn't address my argument you just restated your own. Which is really all you've done throughout this thread. You're a one-trick pony.

Cut the personal attacks, OK?

I didn't address your argument because I think its wrong. Obviously wrong, and unhelpful.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

If you think that's a straw man then you don't know what a straw man is. I'm sure they have some quality community colleges over there in Asia. Maybe you can take a philosophy class.

Just stop.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

You may not be interested in shaming anyone but plenty of people are. Deny it all you want; it won't change reality. As for shaming all those other groups, it's the difference between shaming behavioral habits and physical characteristics. And while I recognize some people's characteristics are a result of behavioral habits there is a big difference.

If a person's physical characteristics are a result of that person's behavioral habits, then what really is this big difference?

Maybe you can get all philosophical. But, I think that if you make a choice to drink and then drive, and that if you harm yourself or others as a result of your decision to drink and drive, that the drunk you and the sober you should be viewed differently. I disagree. And so does the law, for logical and philosophical reasons.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

As Elvira pointed out, the overweight person wears their "sin" on their sleeve. If you're in the grocery store behind the guy who has had a DUI you wouldn't know it just by looking at him. You wouldn't think to look into his cart and judge him based on his choices, even if he's got a couple cases of beer. But an overweight person...different ballgame. People do judge. And sometimes they publicly shame. And this is no straw man. I've witnessed it a few times, most recently about 2 months ago when an overweight woman (dressed as though she was coming home from a professional setting and very well put together) put a carton of ice cream in her shopping cart. Another woman not far away made a face at her and said, "Do you really need that?" Deny it all you want; people are openly nasty to overweight people. No amount of you denying that will change it.

That's terrible. But, so what? I'm not denying that it happens or arguing that it should.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

If it's not easy maybe you shouldn't say it is. See how that works?

Read carefully, please. I stated clearly that losing weight may be difficult. but, that the way to lose weight is not some mystery.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

One a macro level, yes, it is that simple.

Yes. It is.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

But when we are talking large groups of people that one-size-fits-all approach is pretty brainless. People are too dynamic to fit into that simplistic a formula. When you get down to a case-by-case analysis you literally have to approach every person individually. You have to understand them as an individual. I realize this is hard because it involves throwing some real critical thinking at the problem and it's just a lot easier to say, "eat less, move more" but if you're not going to take the hard road, maybe it's better you just keep quiet and not pollute the airways with uninformed opinions about how easy something is. An empty bag is better than one filled with dog ____.

Bah. Stop making excuses for people.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

You're right: I don't know you or what you know. My statement isn't one of assuming anything about you rather than being confident that whatever your knowledge base is it is not as informed as my wife's. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm confident I'm not.

Good for you. Your statement is still meaningless. You can be just as confident that you are the smartest person on the planet and I will be confident that you are not.

See how that works?

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

See above. It's simple at the macro level, very complex at the micro level. I think anyone can succeed at losing weight. But one standard formula isn't going to work for everyone.

Actually it will. Caloric intake and caloric burn is the way it works.

Now, I agree that some people have more efficient metabolisms and others are genetically predisposed to be heavier rather than thinner.

Nonetheless, just 40 years ago we were as a nation much thinner.

The only thing that has changed is caloric intake and caloric burn.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

It sounds like you feel threatened by my confidence in this claim.

Yes. I am threatened by your rejection of a scientific fact and arithmetic formula.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

Just like you seem to feel threatened by a fat person having confidence in her appearance. If it's irrelevant why take the time to tell me it's irrelevant?

Because you don't seem to be able to understand the clear meaning of my posts.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

I agree. This process is not as easy as it sounds for a lot of people. In fact, your wording is significant because you said "lifestyle choices." For many, losing weight and keeping it off requires a complete lifestyle overhaul. Let that sink in. Have you ever had to do that in your adult life? Have you ever had to entirely re-invent the way you do literally everything in your life? I'm guessing at your age (did you say you are in your 50s?) you have made some changes in your life over time. But have you ever had to completely overhaul your lifestyle? If not, maybe a little compassion for someone who has had to do so is better serving than being judgmental.

I'm dealing with my second type of cancer. I've dealt with cancers since I was a teen. I've dealt with a host of other health problems, as well. One can be compassionate and judgmental at the same time. These are not mutually exclusive.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

I didn't tell you yet how the example I witness in the grocery store ended. The overweight woman just shook her head and said, "My life my decision." The snotty woman wandered off. By chance I made eye contact with the overweight woman and in an attempt to lighten her mood made a comment about her choice of flavor. It was a dumb comment but it worked. She gave a frustrated smile and said, "In the last year I've lost almost 60 pounds. I'm not done but it's been a long week and I just want to treat myself tonight."

Good for her. I agree that the other woman was rude.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

So this woman was well on her way to improving herself and just wanted one Friday night indulgence and couldn't even get that without being judged by someone else. And many don't see a problem with this. And that's because they don't understand the problem on an individual level. And that's because they lack the will or ability to apply critical thinking to this issue.

More likely simply because they are rude.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

Again, the degree to which weight issues get blamed for rising health costs is disproportionate. This seems to be your gripe and is a standard, tired old re-tread for why people should be able to shame others.

1. Even if over-stated, the problem is real and significant already and growing.

2. I have not argued that people should be able to shame anyone.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

We do seem to be moving further and further away from personal responsibility in this country and I find that alarming.

We left personal responsibility a LONG time ago. The alarm sounded decades ago. You're only now starting to be alarmed?

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

There are plenty of overweight people who refuse to acknowledge their own role in their situation and until they do they'll never make the changes they need to make.

Of course.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

But again: the degree to which this actually affects you or anyone else...pretty small.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

I can at least appreciate someone who can be blunt and say, "I just don't like fatties" instead of hiding behind the health and collective liability arguments. I may wish that person had more tact, but I can at least appreciate the honesty.

Are you questioning my honesty?

GTFOOH.

[Salmonburgher]

Originally Posted by iknowftbll

I think we're close on the causality. Industrialization often leads to a more sedentary culture because machines replace manual labor. Additives in foods ensure quantity but destroy quality. In the U.S. there are still a lot of jobs that require manual labor and that is a product of sheer size (we're over 330 million people and the world's second largest economy behind China who only recently passed us up). But for the most part physical activity here has been relegated to a recreational role. We all have different interests so not everyone is going to be interested in hiking, kayaking, playing ball, landscaping as a hobby, lifting weights and on and on it goes. I swear if we could convince more kids to put down the xbox controller and pick up an actual football or baseball glove we could put a major dent in this trend in a single generation.

Yes. This is obvious.