The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Click
Report on yahoo news which basically says that Shadow Health Secretary has come out and said that fat people need to stop making excuses (either themselves or for them by other people) and lose weight.
Is this fair? If someone is happy being fat, should they be actively encouraged to lose weight? Being fat can bring health issues, as we all know, so even if someone is happy & healthy now, but large, is there a way of forcing them to lose weight? If there is, should it be done?
Personally, I don't generally see many happy fat people. What I do see, in the town where I live, is a definite increase in their numbers. Sorry, I know that last setence makes me sound like some kind of sizest, but there we go.
Fat children - is it their fault? Probably not, at 5, 6 years of age etc, you eat whatever your parents give you to eat. Is there an excuse for not eating healthily? I can only think of one - laziness.
Discuss.
Report on yahoo news which basically says that Shadow Health Secretary has come out and said that fat people need to stop making excuses (either themselves or for them by other people) and lose weight.
Is this fair? If someone is happy being fat, should they be actively encouraged to lose weight? Being fat can bring health issues, as we all know, so even if someone is happy & healthy now, but large, is there a way of forcing them to lose weight? If there is, should it be done?
Personally, I don't generally see many happy fat people. What I do see, in the town where I live, is a definite increase in their numbers. Sorry, I know that last setence makes me sound like some kind of sizest, but there we go.
Fat children - is it their fault? Probably not, at 5, 6 years of age etc, you eat whatever your parents give you to eat. Is there an excuse for not eating healthily? I can only think of one - laziness.
Discuss.
Page:
They still do GADs here right? When you write ridiculous amounts?
Erowid wrote:
"very moral, or responsible (not that I was suggesting any of you were)."
It's fun to twist things
As for fatties (Is that the plural?) people do a lot of things for comfort. I pick my nose and eat it, engage in sexual activity, bite my nails, and occasionally I walk around in circles and start touching tiles with my right foot. If I do any of those things in public (with the possibly easier exception of biting my nails) I get FROWNED UPON
So I tend to keep it private (and legal) and you've gotta ask.. why?
Picking my nose is 'disgusting' to begin with, never mind actually eating it. But.. what, why? It's just a habit, I'm consuming mucus, you know, stuff that's already in your body (OHBUTITCOLLECTSDIRT) yeah, er, what? The tiniest amount of dirt? (ANDIT'LLHAVEGERMS) Oh, I see! Sorry. But surely, I mean, if I'm collecting germs up my nose, they're going to spread elsewhere anyway? It seems like if I remove the mucus/snot/bogey whatever, then I can stop the spread there, maybe? Well perhaps more than if I leave it there. And I'll move it to a nice wobbly pool of acid instead (granted, travelling through my mouth to begin with). And besides, what sort of viruses might I collect up my nose anyway? Rhinoviruses, by any chance, the most common virus there is? Did you know acid actually deactivates rhinoviruses? Did I know this when I was younger? Of course I did, and it was nothing to do with I found it tasty. Haha
I can't seem to have sex in public. I won't bother arguing about that.
I also bite my nails (OMGGERMS) and yes, can't say rhinoviruses this time, can I? Nah this is just a nervous thing I do with my hands, and like said, it's pretty acceptable now anyway. I think thankfully people realised how daft it was to say NOOO. So yeah, this is comfort. You could argue about building up immunity but pft
And as for walking around in circles and touching tiles with my right foot, this is of course 'insanity' and I should be 'locked up' and I'm 'crazy' and so on and so forth.
But again, it's for comfort. I do it when I'm thinking, or talking, and I want to concentrate on what I'm thinking about. I keep my body busy so I can concentrate on thinking and talking clearly. People itch themselves and shuffle their feet etc, nobody moans about that, I just take it a step further because sometimes it's hard for me to focus, sorry!
All in all I do a few strange things for comfort. So for me to turn up and say "Eating for comfort? Rubbish nobody should do that, nobody needs comfort" then that'd be ridiculous. If you want to eat for comfort, then, ok. I wouldn't really recommend it (even though it tastes soooo good (see bogeys)) but there's just this all money/amount of food in the world/your health/ability to be caught falling from the top window of a burning building/etc. But yeah. People need comfort, sometimes, I think. I don't see why not. Sometimes it's not so easy.
I guess the problem really is what you do for comfort. If you delude yourself into thinking say.. 'everything is ok' when it genuinely isn't - and I don't mean 'oh things are tough' but 'This is too close to death' genuine - then I think that's dangerous. I find denial incredibly dangerous and it worries me far too much. That's when I find it hard to give comfort, if I suspect that.
But then you've got things like smoking, which are 'well, yeah they'll probably give me cancer but hell, I like them' - which is.. alright, I guess. You could argue that they're deluded, but at least they have a decent idea of what they can do. Bit more prepared, at least.
I suppose that's where greed comes into it, in a way. If you use something as a comfort, but you're deluded to the point that you don't realise how much damage it's doing to you.. of course you'll use it a lot! What's stopping you? It's not doing any damage, you're not hurting yourself or anyone, you're happy! And yeah, I think people can be genuinely happy, but they can be genuinely deluded too. It's a horrible thought to think that happiness may merely be for a delusion but I'll avoid that. (Because equally sadness, and heaven forbid, depression, can be too.)
So it seems this greed can eventually ruin someone, even though it makes them very happy indeed. And for the ones that aren't so blinkered to it, why are they actually unhappy? People may say 'I'm unhappy because I'm fat' but again, like these things tend to, it seems a bit vague. Are you unhappy because you can't fit through doorways, are you unhappy because you can't see your genitals without mirrors, or are you unhappy because people STARE at you and LAUGH at you etc? Or are you unhappy because you realise your life may very well be a lot shorter because of your attitude to your health?
See, I've got it lucky. My comforts I genuinely can hide. You can't hide alcoholism very well, nor drug abuse, nor cake abuse. Am I saying everyone should pick their nose and walk in circles instead? Hell no and I can't compare the addiction of comfort eating to eating snot either, but well, I'm giving a good go to quit smoking and I find it a lot easier than stopping eating my snot.
The thing is though it seems people who drink a lot for comfort and people who take drugs a lot for comfort are seemingly self-destructive. I don't think people who enjoy eating are generally self-destructive. Makes no sense. "I'm eating food to kill myself." It seems more self-indulgent, how perhaps drugs start, before it stops becoming pleasurable, and more comforting to a physical desire of your body. (I can't use the word need, I'm sorry. I know it can mean want too, but I'd rather use the word want because the usual understanding of need is 'absolute requirement' and cannot be argued to it's necessity. It's not that I don't have empathy for drug addicts, it's just that I don't want to start confusing what the word 'need' means because it's confused enough already. I just think it's an overwhelming incredibly powerful desire, something that will feel as close to the requirement of breathing as it might get and anyone in that situation is facing possibly one of the hardest tasks a person can have. Personally I am addicted to breathing although I have tried to give it up a few times.)
So it's a conflict, isn't it? It's a natural instinct to want to eat, especially when the sensual enjoyment remains. You can't just cut it out, go cold turkey like you can with other comforts. You actually need food. I suppose you could say 'well go cold turkey on fattening food' (there's something odd about that sentence) but it's like me saying 'well I'll just smoke a quarter of a cigarette' in a way. It must be incredibly hard to try to cut out the enjoyable side of something you actually -have- to do.
I am however skinny, although not as skinny as I have been (phew, nobody looks at me any more!). I dislike food most of the time. I'll eat all I need to eat and that'll do. I do enjoy different tastes, but I really can't be bothered with it, and I actually found myself saying 'Why are all the tastiest things so healthy?' the other day which made me frown at myself.
So yeah! Comfort eating, in analysis and an attempt to understand it, I think I can feel sympathy. I imagine it's a very hard addiction to break. It seems well, the best you can really do is stop that addiction from ever forming to begin with, and well, at that age I guess it's almost completely down to the parents. If I ever have a child with a mother that says "Oh come on she can have one more slice of cake" and the angle of which the slice is cut is of a higher degree than of her legs in sexy time, I will seriously consider familycide.
As for other reasons, of course there are. But I think people who do comfort eat get a hard time, if that's the reason for their weight gain.
Ok, better explain that.
You look at a smoker, and you think of 'what's wrong with it'. What do people say?
-One- of the first things you hear is "Don't smoke around me or my children" - fine. Absolutely and I hate/d doing it, unless they smoke too. I think passive smoke (although seriously bizarre) is at least an absolutely tiny risk, and this absolutely tiny risk of me being responsible for them developing a tumour or something is one I'd rather not take, cheers. It's much easier to care for others than yourself sometimes. If I did smoke in front of someone I'd ask their permission first. Some say no, some say yes, and I still try and keep my distance if they say yes, although I've not scientifically worked out how far away I need to be.
Ok, so that gets ruled out, for me anyway. What's left?
'It's expensive, it stinks, it makes your teeth yellow, it gives you cancer.'
And from that, let's look at the reasons for why people 'hate' fat people.
'They smell, they're ugly, they take up two seats, you can't get past them in small corridors, they're unfit, they're lazy, they're unhealthy.'
Anyone seen what the hell I'm getting at here?
No? Maybe not because a lot of you are saying it.
When a fat person gets on a bus, and someone looks at them and laughs, what does the fat person think?
"Great, they think I'm fat and ugly."
And this is well, unfortunately, probably what they're thinking. You know what'd be better? If the fat person thought:
"Great, they're laughing at me because I'm increasing my risk of heart disease, organ failure and various other things that will kill me."
Because somehow, somewhere along the line, someone's priorities seemed to get mixed up and for some reason we've actually.. listened to it? And paid attention?
So.. lumping together, 'they're ugly' and 'they should exercise, I do!' and so forth, TOGETHER - not separate, not, like it's any more important, but TOGETHER with 'these people are probably going to die at an early age'. And sometimes if it's not together, it's not even considered!
But how can you say that! EVERYONE bloody knows by now that being overweight can contribute to so many horrible things that can happen to your body. But it's like because so much focus is placed on the appearance, the physical logic of it is lost. Can you imagine what the world would be like if people with disease, and disability, that they go to the Doctors to and get told 'look, it's gonna kill you' - didn't pay attention to this? Because everywhere they went they'd get people laughing and pointing and giggling with their mates saying 'hur hur guy in a wheelchair' and 'hur hur look he's got a colostomy bag'.
No 'being fat' is not a disease, but it increases your likelihood of being dead sooner than you'd hope.
"Hur hur hur fatty"
Sorry, no. And what's worse? Some of these 'fatties' aren't even in any HEALTH RISK at all! Good lord?!? You mean, are people calling people 'fat' when they're not even near it? That they're actually fit and well and healthy? Overweight? What? What does that even mean? More on that later.
It's the same principle as 'God I hate smokers, they stink the place out' - yeah, and they're killing themselves. They are addicted to a substance that will quite possibly give them disease and cancer. And you're moaning that they stink? Well, phew, good job it's so likely they'll die then, what you should really do is get them to smoke MORE, because perhaps that'll kill them quicker maybe as it's more important? Then when they're dead they won't smell of cigarettes at all, then you won't have to put up with it! Hurray! But oh no! They smell because they're decomposing! If only they hadn't spent all that money on cigarettes they could afford a decent funeral. Oh well, not your problem!
There are all these tiny little things that seem to bother people beyond this obvious realisation of what really matters. Suddenly appearance, space on a bus(?!?), smell(!!) and obvious lack of exercise is more important than someone's actual lifespan. And no I will not link lack of exercise to lifespan because I get the feeling the way people use it is not in the "Gosh they're not going to live long" but "They're LAZY I'm not lazy, no not me at all pip pip race you to the top of the hill fatty I'm so much better than you"
Even if you argue 'well they're not OVERLY fat and so on, but they still stink, and that's all there is to them and that's all there is to complain about' - why are they smelling? I imagine it's sweat, because if it was a lack of hygiene for other reasons I can't see how you can blame them being fat for it. So if it is sweat, then that means they're unfit, unhealthy, and that -actually- means not likely to live long. 'Some people sweat anyway more than others!' fine. Then it's nothing to do with being fat. 'They take up too much room on the bus' - seriously. If they're that big that they actually take up the room of two people, then you really can't argue their health. If you say 'yeah but it's just that there's SO many fat people on the bus, it's not that they all take up two people' then maybe you're underweight.
So these things get thrown at people and it's no wonder they miss the point. 'Gosh I wish you didn't smoke it makes you smell so bad'. (This is a pointless point to make by the way - when you smoke, you can't smell it very well) 'Gosh I wish you'd lose weight we have to spend so much money on deodorant.' (I'm not sure of being able to smell sweat and being fat has anything close to do with each other though). But it's just.. you have all these horrible reasons, these HORRIBLE judgements that make this person bad for absolutely seemingly no good reason at all. I know a lot of people I consider friends and they smell. I think they're good people. I've even seen them give money to charity, which scientifically proves they are 'good' - (They did research in 1985). But really, try and prioritise here.
Do I find overweight people attractive? No. I still have some programming in me saying 'bleh that's disgusting' but at least I know how seemingly shallow that is now and it place it below the thought of 'you probably aren't going to live long'. Do I find curves attractive? Yes. There's a difference between hating something, and it just being unattractive. Unattractive means you don't have interest, right? I'm kinda interested in the sounds you could make if the body was kinda like silly putty but honestly, that's as far as it goes.
But then you get the 'FAT PEOPLE ARE LAZY' brigade. 'FAT PEOPLE ARE RUDE'.
No.
No no. PEOPLE are lazy. PEOPLE are rude. They just also happen to be FAT. Now I'm sure you could scientifically/psychologically link the two, such along the lines of say.. fat people are rude because taboo says that they have been bullied and mistreated by other people, so in a defence mechanism have simply cut themselves out from the world to the point of just being rude to everyone because they don't think anyone cares about them so why care about anyone else! *breathes*
But the point still remains, you could replace that with anyone. Someone may have been bullied for being disabled, bullied for being ugly, bullied for being.. beautiful. It's hard to say that there is 'evil' stored in the fat cells that surround a fat person, which seep out into the fat person's behaviour. Perhaps the lack of decent nutrients will in fact yes, affect their behaviour and mood, but you don't have to be fat for that to happen either.
I guess in some half-assed conclusion, this whole 'fat' thing I dislike as a label. Why? Because the meaning of the word has changed.
Think about it, you hear the word fat, what does it mean to you? First off it's seen as an insult (Gosh never tell a woman they're fat blah blahakngmslam), second, it's linked to being unhealthy, so you think that too, then, 'disgusting', foul, etc, rude perhaps, smelly, so on.
It doesn't mean any of those things. It means 'fat'. And that's again this worrying thing, it's not the word's fault, it's how people use it. Saying "I slapped a woman in the face" might get responses of "Gosh, that's harsh" but you say "I slapped a fat woman in the face" and suddenly it's funnier, almost more acceptable like she 'deserves' it, and what did you do? You added one word. You could even say 'I slapped a corpulent woman' and people might still think maybe she deserved it because nobody has a clue what it means and it sounds kinda insulting. (It means fat.)
But it's just one word, that's all it is. Fat basically means 'has too much flesh'. I'd prefer it if people said that, to be honest.
"Do you think we'll be able to get across the bridge?"
"I think I can, but I think you've got too much flesh."
But why hate them or insult them for that? It's the truth, in this situation. The bridge will possibly break. It's not an insult, you're genuinely giving them advice to not go across the bridge because it might break.
"Can you pass?"
"There's seemingly no room."
"Why not?"
"One of us has too much flesh and I think it's you."
I guess it's not so insulting if you only say when you're asked. And besides, for all you know, these people could be both 'underweight'. Funny that? Did you picture massive people for the stories? I didn't say massive, large, disgusting, etc. I said too much flesh, and in these situations they had too much. The bridge may have been incredibly incredibly fragile. The gap may have been very tight indeed. But fat and now too much flesh suddenly means you wobble from side to side and small children could have parties on you.
So maybe it's better to think of practicality instead of this attitude of 'you smell because you're fat' etc. If the person is wanting to become a spy, then, yes, maybe smelling would be a problem because she'd get sniffed out. And if say perhaps, a nuclear explosion was going to wipe out London, THEN maybe, in order to save as many people as you can you will have to remove people with too much flesh to begin with. It's nothing personal, it's just that we can get two people to one of you. This is why businessmen became fat, out of the hope that they may say 'oh but I am more important, I help the economy' and they'll say 'Ok, we better leave two skinny unemployed people behind instead'
So I guess the next time, say, your girlfriend, or your wife says, "Do you think I'm fat?" you could actually remember the logical meaning of the word, 'have too much flesh', and just say 'It depends on the situation.'
If it ruins your relationship I apologise in advance. I promise to test this when I can and let you know how it goes.
"very moral, or responsible (not that I was suggesting any of you were)."
It's fun to twist things
As for fatties (Is that the plural?) people do a lot of things for comfort. I pick my nose and eat it, engage in sexual activity, bite my nails, and occasionally I walk around in circles and start touching tiles with my right foot. If I do any of those things in public (with the possibly easier exception of biting my nails) I get FROWNED UPON
So I tend to keep it private (and legal) and you've gotta ask.. why?
Picking my nose is 'disgusting' to begin with, never mind actually eating it. But.. what, why? It's just a habit, I'm consuming mucus, you know, stuff that's already in your body (OHBUTITCOLLECTSDIRT) yeah, er, what? The tiniest amount of dirt? (ANDIT'LLHAVEGERMS) Oh, I see! Sorry. But surely, I mean, if I'm collecting germs up my nose, they're going to spread elsewhere anyway? It seems like if I remove the mucus/snot/bogey whatever, then I can stop the spread there, maybe? Well perhaps more than if I leave it there. And I'll move it to a nice wobbly pool of acid instead (granted, travelling through my mouth to begin with). And besides, what sort of viruses might I collect up my nose anyway? Rhinoviruses, by any chance, the most common virus there is? Did you know acid actually deactivates rhinoviruses? Did I know this when I was younger? Of course I did, and it was nothing to do with I found it tasty. Haha
I can't seem to have sex in public. I won't bother arguing about that.
I also bite my nails (OMGGERMS) and yes, can't say rhinoviruses this time, can I? Nah this is just a nervous thing I do with my hands, and like said, it's pretty acceptable now anyway. I think thankfully people realised how daft it was to say NOOO. So yeah, this is comfort. You could argue about building up immunity but pft
And as for walking around in circles and touching tiles with my right foot, this is of course 'insanity' and I should be 'locked up' and I'm 'crazy' and so on and so forth.
But again, it's for comfort. I do it when I'm thinking, or talking, and I want to concentrate on what I'm thinking about. I keep my body busy so I can concentrate on thinking and talking clearly. People itch themselves and shuffle their feet etc, nobody moans about that, I just take it a step further because sometimes it's hard for me to focus, sorry!
All in all I do a few strange things for comfort. So for me to turn up and say "Eating for comfort? Rubbish nobody should do that, nobody needs comfort" then that'd be ridiculous. If you want to eat for comfort, then, ok. I wouldn't really recommend it (even though it tastes soooo good (see bogeys)) but there's just this all money/amount of food in the world/your health/ability to be caught falling from the top window of a burning building/etc. But yeah. People need comfort, sometimes, I think. I don't see why not. Sometimes it's not so easy.
I guess the problem really is what you do for comfort. If you delude yourself into thinking say.. 'everything is ok' when it genuinely isn't - and I don't mean 'oh things are tough' but 'This is too close to death' genuine - then I think that's dangerous. I find denial incredibly dangerous and it worries me far too much. That's when I find it hard to give comfort, if I suspect that.
But then you've got things like smoking, which are 'well, yeah they'll probably give me cancer but hell, I like them' - which is.. alright, I guess. You could argue that they're deluded, but at least they have a decent idea of what they can do. Bit more prepared, at least.
I suppose that's where greed comes into it, in a way. If you use something as a comfort, but you're deluded to the point that you don't realise how much damage it's doing to you.. of course you'll use it a lot! What's stopping you? It's not doing any damage, you're not hurting yourself or anyone, you're happy! And yeah, I think people can be genuinely happy, but they can be genuinely deluded too. It's a horrible thought to think that happiness may merely be for a delusion but I'll avoid that. (Because equally sadness, and heaven forbid, depression, can be too.)
So it seems this greed can eventually ruin someone, even though it makes them very happy indeed. And for the ones that aren't so blinkered to it, why are they actually unhappy? People may say 'I'm unhappy because I'm fat' but again, like these things tend to, it seems a bit vague. Are you unhappy because you can't fit through doorways, are you unhappy because you can't see your genitals without mirrors, or are you unhappy because people STARE at you and LAUGH at you etc? Or are you unhappy because you realise your life may very well be a lot shorter because of your attitude to your health?
See, I've got it lucky. My comforts I genuinely can hide. You can't hide alcoholism very well, nor drug abuse, nor cake abuse. Am I saying everyone should pick their nose and walk in circles instead? Hell no and I can't compare the addiction of comfort eating to eating snot either, but well, I'm giving a good go to quit smoking and I find it a lot easier than stopping eating my snot.
The thing is though it seems people who drink a lot for comfort and people who take drugs a lot for comfort are seemingly self-destructive. I don't think people who enjoy eating are generally self-destructive. Makes no sense. "I'm eating food to kill myself." It seems more self-indulgent, how perhaps drugs start, before it stops becoming pleasurable, and more comforting to a physical desire of your body. (I can't use the word need, I'm sorry. I know it can mean want too, but I'd rather use the word want because the usual understanding of need is 'absolute requirement' and cannot be argued to it's necessity. It's not that I don't have empathy for drug addicts, it's just that I don't want to start confusing what the word 'need' means because it's confused enough already. I just think it's an overwhelming incredibly powerful desire, something that will feel as close to the requirement of breathing as it might get and anyone in that situation is facing possibly one of the hardest tasks a person can have. Personally I am addicted to breathing although I have tried to give it up a few times.)
So it's a conflict, isn't it? It's a natural instinct to want to eat, especially when the sensual enjoyment remains. You can't just cut it out, go cold turkey like you can with other comforts. You actually need food. I suppose you could say 'well go cold turkey on fattening food' (there's something odd about that sentence) but it's like me saying 'well I'll just smoke a quarter of a cigarette' in a way. It must be incredibly hard to try to cut out the enjoyable side of something you actually -have- to do.
I am however skinny, although not as skinny as I have been (phew, nobody looks at me any more!). I dislike food most of the time. I'll eat all I need to eat and that'll do. I do enjoy different tastes, but I really can't be bothered with it, and I actually found myself saying 'Why are all the tastiest things so healthy?' the other day which made me frown at myself.
So yeah! Comfort eating, in analysis and an attempt to understand it, I think I can feel sympathy. I imagine it's a very hard addiction to break. It seems well, the best you can really do is stop that addiction from ever forming to begin with, and well, at that age I guess it's almost completely down to the parents. If I ever have a child with a mother that says "Oh come on she can have one more slice of cake" and the angle of which the slice is cut is of a higher degree than of her legs in sexy time, I will seriously consider familycide.
As for other reasons, of course there are. But I think people who do comfort eat get a hard time, if that's the reason for their weight gain.
Ok, better explain that.
You look at a smoker, and you think of 'what's wrong with it'. What do people say?
-One- of the first things you hear is "Don't smoke around me or my children" - fine. Absolutely and I hate/d doing it, unless they smoke too. I think passive smoke (although seriously bizarre) is at least an absolutely tiny risk, and this absolutely tiny risk of me being responsible for them developing a tumour or something is one I'd rather not take, cheers. It's much easier to care for others than yourself sometimes. If I did smoke in front of someone I'd ask their permission first. Some say no, some say yes, and I still try and keep my distance if they say yes, although I've not scientifically worked out how far away I need to be.
Ok, so that gets ruled out, for me anyway. What's left?
'It's expensive, it stinks, it makes your teeth yellow, it gives you cancer.'
And from that, let's look at the reasons for why people 'hate' fat people.
'They smell, they're ugly, they take up two seats, you can't get past them in small corridors, they're unfit, they're lazy, they're unhealthy.'
Anyone seen what the hell I'm getting at here?
No? Maybe not because a lot of you are saying it.
When a fat person gets on a bus, and someone looks at them and laughs, what does the fat person think?
"Great, they think I'm fat and ugly."
And this is well, unfortunately, probably what they're thinking. You know what'd be better? If the fat person thought:
"Great, they're laughing at me because I'm increasing my risk of heart disease, organ failure and various other things that will kill me."
Because somehow, somewhere along the line, someone's priorities seemed to get mixed up and for some reason we've actually.. listened to it? And paid attention?
So.. lumping together, 'they're ugly' and 'they should exercise, I do!' and so forth, TOGETHER - not separate, not, like it's any more important, but TOGETHER with 'these people are probably going to die at an early age'. And sometimes if it's not together, it's not even considered!
But how can you say that! EVERYONE bloody knows by now that being overweight can contribute to so many horrible things that can happen to your body. But it's like because so much focus is placed on the appearance, the physical logic of it is lost. Can you imagine what the world would be like if people with disease, and disability, that they go to the Doctors to and get told 'look, it's gonna kill you' - didn't pay attention to this? Because everywhere they went they'd get people laughing and pointing and giggling with their mates saying 'hur hur guy in a wheelchair' and 'hur hur look he's got a colostomy bag'.
No 'being fat' is not a disease, but it increases your likelihood of being dead sooner than you'd hope.
"Hur hur hur fatty"
Sorry, no. And what's worse? Some of these 'fatties' aren't even in any HEALTH RISK at all! Good lord?!? You mean, are people calling people 'fat' when they're not even near it? That they're actually fit and well and healthy? Overweight? What? What does that even mean? More on that later.
It's the same principle as 'God I hate smokers, they stink the place out' - yeah, and they're killing themselves. They are addicted to a substance that will quite possibly give them disease and cancer. And you're moaning that they stink? Well, phew, good job it's so likely they'll die then, what you should really do is get them to smoke MORE, because perhaps that'll kill them quicker maybe as it's more important? Then when they're dead they won't smell of cigarettes at all, then you won't have to put up with it! Hurray! But oh no! They smell because they're decomposing! If only they hadn't spent all that money on cigarettes they could afford a decent funeral. Oh well, not your problem!
There are all these tiny little things that seem to bother people beyond this obvious realisation of what really matters. Suddenly appearance, space on a bus(?!?), smell(!!) and obvious lack of exercise is more important than someone's actual lifespan. And no I will not link lack of exercise to lifespan because I get the feeling the way people use it is not in the "Gosh they're not going to live long" but "They're LAZY I'm not lazy, no not me at all pip pip race you to the top of the hill fatty I'm so much better than you"
Even if you argue 'well they're not OVERLY fat and so on, but they still stink, and that's all there is to them and that's all there is to complain about' - why are they smelling? I imagine it's sweat, because if it was a lack of hygiene for other reasons I can't see how you can blame them being fat for it. So if it is sweat, then that means they're unfit, unhealthy, and that -actually- means not likely to live long. 'Some people sweat anyway more than others!' fine. Then it's nothing to do with being fat. 'They take up too much room on the bus' - seriously. If they're that big that they actually take up the room of two people, then you really can't argue their health. If you say 'yeah but it's just that there's SO many fat people on the bus, it's not that they all take up two people' then maybe you're underweight.
So these things get thrown at people and it's no wonder they miss the point. 'Gosh I wish you didn't smoke it makes you smell so bad'. (This is a pointless point to make by the way - when you smoke, you can't smell it very well) 'Gosh I wish you'd lose weight we have to spend so much money on deodorant.' (I'm not sure of being able to smell sweat and being fat has anything close to do with each other though). But it's just.. you have all these horrible reasons, these HORRIBLE judgements that make this person bad for absolutely seemingly no good reason at all. I know a lot of people I consider friends and they smell. I think they're good people. I've even seen them give money to charity, which scientifically proves they are 'good' - (They did research in 1985). But really, try and prioritise here.
Do I find overweight people attractive? No. I still have some programming in me saying 'bleh that's disgusting' but at least I know how seemingly shallow that is now and it place it below the thought of 'you probably aren't going to live long'. Do I find curves attractive? Yes. There's a difference between hating something, and it just being unattractive. Unattractive means you don't have interest, right? I'm kinda interested in the sounds you could make if the body was kinda like silly putty but honestly, that's as far as it goes.
But then you get the 'FAT PEOPLE ARE LAZY' brigade. 'FAT PEOPLE ARE RUDE'.
No.
No no. PEOPLE are lazy. PEOPLE are rude. They just also happen to be FAT. Now I'm sure you could scientifically/psychologically link the two, such along the lines of say.. fat people are rude because taboo says that they have been bullied and mistreated by other people, so in a defence mechanism have simply cut themselves out from the world to the point of just being rude to everyone because they don't think anyone cares about them so why care about anyone else! *breathes*
But the point still remains, you could replace that with anyone. Someone may have been bullied for being disabled, bullied for being ugly, bullied for being.. beautiful. It's hard to say that there is 'evil' stored in the fat cells that surround a fat person, which seep out into the fat person's behaviour. Perhaps the lack of decent nutrients will in fact yes, affect their behaviour and mood, but you don't have to be fat for that to happen either.
I guess in some half-assed conclusion, this whole 'fat' thing I dislike as a label. Why? Because the meaning of the word has changed.
Think about it, you hear the word fat, what does it mean to you? First off it's seen as an insult (Gosh never tell a woman they're fat blah blahakngmslam), second, it's linked to being unhealthy, so you think that too, then, 'disgusting', foul, etc, rude perhaps, smelly, so on.
It doesn't mean any of those things. It means 'fat'. And that's again this worrying thing, it's not the word's fault, it's how people use it. Saying "I slapped a woman in the face" might get responses of "Gosh, that's harsh" but you say "I slapped a fat woman in the face" and suddenly it's funnier, almost more acceptable like she 'deserves' it, and what did you do? You added one word. You could even say 'I slapped a corpulent woman' and people might still think maybe she deserved it because nobody has a clue what it means and it sounds kinda insulting. (It means fat.)
But it's just one word, that's all it is. Fat basically means 'has too much flesh'. I'd prefer it if people said that, to be honest.
"Do you think we'll be able to get across the bridge?"
"I think I can, but I think you've got too much flesh."
But why hate them or insult them for that? It's the truth, in this situation. The bridge will possibly break. It's not an insult, you're genuinely giving them advice to not go across the bridge because it might break.
"Can you pass?"
"There's seemingly no room."
"Why not?"
"One of us has too much flesh and I think it's you."
I guess it's not so insulting if you only say when you're asked. And besides, for all you know, these people could be both 'underweight'. Funny that? Did you picture massive people for the stories? I didn't say massive, large, disgusting, etc. I said too much flesh, and in these situations they had too much. The bridge may have been incredibly incredibly fragile. The gap may have been very tight indeed. But fat and now too much flesh suddenly means you wobble from side to side and small children could have parties on you.
So maybe it's better to think of practicality instead of this attitude of 'you smell because you're fat' etc. If the person is wanting to become a spy, then, yes, maybe smelling would be a problem because she'd get sniffed out. And if say perhaps, a nuclear explosion was going to wipe out London, THEN maybe, in order to save as many people as you can you will have to remove people with too much flesh to begin with. It's nothing personal, it's just that we can get two people to one of you. This is why businessmen became fat, out of the hope that they may say 'oh but I am more important, I help the economy' and they'll say 'Ok, we better leave two skinny unemployed people behind instead'
So I guess the next time, say, your girlfriend, or your wife says, "Do you think I'm fat?" you could actually remember the logical meaning of the word, 'have too much flesh', and just say 'It depends on the situation.'
If it ruins your relationship I apologise in advance. I promise to test this when I can and let you know how it goes.
I think it's a delicate subject, far too often people assume there's a simple solution the problem, comedians don't help with some of the propoganda they come out with. Yeah they're only doing they're job and I accept that, but a lot of people simply assume overweight people eat a lot more than those that aren't.
Not always true in my experience, metabolism plays a huge part for one. My girlfriend is fairly heavier than me but she eats the same meals I do, we're both lovers of soups/salads, light snacks, yet I'm only at the age of 28/29 really starting to fill out.
I'm indecided as to the real solution BUT one thing I think is terrible is how they jump from drugs, to smoking, now to obesity, as undesirable parts of society that must be erradicated. I dare say a lot of those people pushing these views are overweight themselves. We demonise enough members of society (or so it seems), don't think attacking fat people is very moral, or responsible (not that I was suggesting any of you were).
Not always true in my experience, metabolism plays a huge part for one. My girlfriend is fairly heavier than me but she eats the same meals I do, we're both lovers of soups/salads, light snacks, yet I'm only at the age of 28/29 really starting to fill out.
I'm indecided as to the real solution BUT one thing I think is terrible is how they jump from drugs, to smoking, now to obesity, as undesirable parts of society that must be erradicated. I dare say a lot of those people pushing these views are overweight themselves. We demonise enough members of society (or so it seems), don't think attacking fat people is very moral, or responsible (not that I was suggesting any of you were).
If you can't cook or won't cook, then supposedly you take the easy option - pay some one to cook for you or go out to eat. Fine for adults, costly, but their choice.
Kids don't have that choice. As has been said already, the parents need the 'cooking' skills or plenty of money to take the family out to eat.
But where would the parents choose to take the family to eat? You decide on the criteria that may influence their selection of eating establishments and hence the 'variety' of food available:)
Simplistic:)
Kids don't have that choice. As has been said already, the parents need the 'cooking' skills or plenty of money to take the family out to eat.
But where would the parents choose to take the family to eat? You decide on the criteria that may influence their selection of eating establishments and hence the 'variety' of food available:)
Simplistic:)
Silent Thunder wrote:
> some fault must go to the
> cheapness of food and the sheer quantity of fast food restaurants
> etc.
None should. No one is forcing people to go in their and force feed their kid who is still in a pram, a Big Mac - I'm sure I'm not the only person to have seen that.
>Then again people should be able to exercise their own will
> power and not just have food because it's fast and cheap.
I'm not convinced that fast food, or junk food in general, is that much cheaper. If you buy frozen ready meal things, how much do they cost to feed two people? A couple of quid each, per day? Just for dinner this is. That's £10 a week, or £40 a month.
You can go to the market, and buy enough fruit & veg for two weeks, on a less than tenner, easily. Then go to the butchers and buy enough meat (basic maybe - just mince & chicken) for two people for a month for under £20. I know this, because I do it.
The leftover between what you've spent and £40 would get you pasta, rice etc. Same money spent, healthier food. You could even go so far as to argue that you're supporting the little man against the big company (if that's your thing) and you've helped the environment becuase you're not buying stuff in loads of plastic packaging (again, if that's your thing).
Why don't people do it? Because they are lazy. Unless of course there is no market and / or butchers in their town. Then, I'm not sure what to do :-/
This isn't meant to be as vitriolic as it's probably sounds, by the way.
> some fault must go to the
> cheapness of food and the sheer quantity of fast food restaurants
> etc.
None should. No one is forcing people to go in their and force feed their kid who is still in a pram, a Big Mac - I'm sure I'm not the only person to have seen that.
>Then again people should be able to exercise their own will
> power and not just have food because it's fast and cheap.
I'm not convinced that fast food, or junk food in general, is that much cheaper. If you buy frozen ready meal things, how much do they cost to feed two people? A couple of quid each, per day? Just for dinner this is. That's £10 a week, or £40 a month.
You can go to the market, and buy enough fruit & veg for two weeks, on a less than tenner, easily. Then go to the butchers and buy enough meat (basic maybe - just mince & chicken) for two people for a month for under £20. I know this, because I do it.
The leftover between what you've spent and £40 would get you pasta, rice etc. Same money spent, healthier food. You could even go so far as to argue that you're supporting the little man against the big company (if that's your thing) and you've helped the environment becuase you're not buying stuff in loads of plastic packaging (again, if that's your thing).
Why don't people do it? Because they are lazy. Unless of course there is no market and / or butchers in their town. Then, I'm not sure what to do :-/
This isn't meant to be as vitriolic as it's probably sounds, by the way.
Yeah a while ago the government were discussing introducing a 'fat tax'. Hmm I don't know what to think really. I mean maybe it is time for such a thing, it's clear that educating people about the dangers of eating too much isn't working greatly. That's not to say it's entirely a person's fault, some fault must go to the cheapness of food and the sheer quantity of fast food restaurants etc. Then again people should be able to exercise their own will power and not just have food because it's fast and cheap.
You get what you pay for. Quality food will always be more expensive and you're robbing the farmers if you price it down. Instead of bring the price of decent food down, it's been suggested of putting a higher tax on unhealthy food. I suppose is reasonable but legally i think there would be a case for argument.
Maybe if unhealthy food wasn't so cheap and delicious. Yesterday, I got a chicken burger, chips, 7" pizza and a canned drink for £2.50. I'm sure people would eat more healthily if the foods that are better for you were lower priced.
Yeah there are those people who are just too lazy to do anything, i'm not arguing that. My problem with this guys statement is that he's generalising that everyone who is overweight is so because they're too lazy or stupid to do anything about it.
Nin wrote:
> Ill, not unhealthy. Its in no way a ridiculous thing to say,
> it's a perfectly legitimate reason for being overweight,
> especially when it comes to something like diabetes.
Apologies. When you said "poor health" earlier I thought you meant unhealthy.
True, there are some people who are overweight because of health issues. But I suspect, and this is based on me guessing, that nowadays the majority of people became ill because of their weight issues & their illness did not cause the weight gain.
I.e., the eating crap and doing no excerise comes first, and the diabetes etc is a result of that, rather than the other way round.
> Ill, not unhealthy. Its in no way a ridiculous thing to say,
> it's a perfectly legitimate reason for being overweight,
> especially when it comes to something like diabetes.
Apologies. When you said "poor health" earlier I thought you meant unhealthy.
True, there are some people who are overweight because of health issues. But I suspect, and this is based on me guessing, that nowadays the majority of people became ill because of their weight issues & their illness did not cause the weight gain.
I.e., the eating crap and doing no excerise comes first, and the diabetes etc is a result of that, rather than the other way round.
Page: