Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Fat Acceptance (No, I will not make you a sandwich)

145791062

Posts

  • WashWash Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Variable wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    I don't see how keeping kids healthier in general through school from a young age is at all the same as telling your fat friend they need to loose weight.

    The only way you'd be keeping them healthy through school is if the school's feeding them, and cafeteria's aren't everywhere. Teaching a kid how to eat healthy is good, but when that kid has little-to-no control over what they eat, all you're doing is providing them information for the future. And that's if the kids keep up with those classes.

    and this is bad?

    It's ineffective. You're not keeping them healthier in general through school, you're providing half-ass prep for when they have the resources to actually lose weight, after school.

    what is your alternative? isn't it better to do something? school is about education

    I don't think it's the school's business, really. It's the business of the parents and the students. What's the point of education? To learn for the sake of learning, or to learn for application's sake? The kids can't apply what they'd learn, and with the amount of conflicting information I've personally come across regarding how to properly structure a nutritional diet, they'd be better off learning from a nutritionist, not some PE teacher who wouldn't be focusing on it.

    The real education regarding nutrition and living actively comes from outside sources. The school's tried to teach health properly. It has failed so far. I see no problem with the job of teaching this being outsourced.

    u5mv3v50fyfj.png
  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    jeepguy wrote: »
    Yeah I really don't know what's up with our portions. I liked the servings of food that restaurants served in other countries I visited better. I actually had room for desert after eating my dinner!

    One of the reasons I love going to the local joints around here. They spend more on quality food than on "here is a huge pile of cheap garbage."

    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • VariableVariable Ted Hitler Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Variable wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    I don't see how keeping kids healthier in general through school from a young age is at all the same as telling your fat friend they need to loose weight.

    The only way you'd be keeping them healthy through school is if the school's feeding them, and cafeteria's aren't everywhere. Teaching a kid how to eat healthy is good, but when that kid has little-to-no control over what they eat, all you're doing is providing them information for the future. And that's if the kids keep up with those classes.

    and this is bad?

    It's ineffective. You're not keeping them healthier in general through school, you're providing half-ass prep for when they have the resources to actually lose weight, after school.

    what is your alternative? isn't it better to do something? school is about education

    I don't think it's the school's business, really. It's the business of the parents and the students. What's the point of education? To learn for the sake of learning, or to learn for application's sake? The kids can't apply what they'd learn, and with the amount of conflicting information I've personally come across regarding how to properly structure a nutritional diet, they'd be better off learning from a nutritionist, not some PE teacher who wouldn't be focusing on it.

    The real education regarding nutrition and living actively comes from outside sources. The school's tried to teach health properly. It has failed so far. I see no problem with the job of teaching this being outsourced.
    have you ever seen a kid doing algebra on his own time?

    I haven't. but it might apply to his future and is a good thing to learn anyway.

    BNet-Vari#1998 | WiiU-Variable | 3DS-3866-8105-7478 | Steam | Twitch
    Sig%20-%20Hearthstone%20DoA.png
  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    Variable wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    I don't see how keeping kids healthier in general through school from a young age is at all the same as telling your fat friend they need to loose weight.

    The only way you'd be keeping them healthy through school is if the school's feeding them, and cafeteria's aren't everywhere. Teaching a kid how to eat healthy is good, but when that kid has little-to-no control over what they eat, all you're doing is providing them information for the future. And that's if the kids keep up with those classes.

    and this is bad?

    It's ineffective. You're not keeping them healthier in general through school, you're providing half-ass prep for when they have the resources to actually lose weight, after school.

    what is your alternative? isn't it better to do something? school is about education

    I don't think it's the school's business, really. It's the business of the parents and the students. What's the point of education? To learn for the sake of learning, or to learn for application's sake? The kids can't apply what they'd learn, and with the amount of conflicting information I've personally come across regarding how to properly structure a nutritional diet, they'd be better off learning from a nutritionist, not some PE teacher who wouldn't be focusing on it.

    The real education regarding nutrition and living actively comes from outside sources. The school's tried to teach health properly. It has failed so far. I see no problem with the job of teaching this being outsourced.
    And thus, we argue, let's change it to make it more effective

    orrrrr we could say "it never worked before so how can it work in the future"

    also this approach is not mutually exclusive with parents and students also taking it upon themselves to eat correctly and exercise

  • CorvusCorvus Winter crow VancouverRegistered User regular
    edited March 2009
    jeepguy wrote: »
    Yeah I really don't know what's up with our portions. I liked the servings of food that restaurants served in other countries I visited better. I actually had room for desert after eating my dinner!

    Even between Canada and the USA, I find portions at restaurants in the USA are bigger, and ours are too big in Canada to start with.

    The "clean your plate" thing is probably a legacy of the Great Depression and WWII. Those of us somewhat older forumers, our grandparents will have lived through that, and our parents may have lived in places with food shortages during or after WWII. Food Rationing in the UK continued until 1954, for example.

    So, that cultural impact of real food shortages is being passed on as family traditions many decades later when its doing us real harm.

  • WashWash Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    I'll just outright state I don't think schools can properly teach nutrition. Why? Because it would be one part of a large curriculum, and would not receive the attention needed to get the point across. In order to properly teach nutrition it would need to be a separate class, and then made mandatory, because not every kid who needs to take that course will take the course.

    Any information picked up from a school's health class is only useful if the parent is just as informed. Kids don't buy the food, the parents do, and unless the parents are involved, you're not going anywhere. Some parents will not be on board with a lifestyle change. It may be too convenient and expensive for them. You'd really have better luck teaching the parents about nutrition than the kids, because they're the ones who control the food.

    Finally, as it's been mentioned in this thread, changing to a healthy, physically active lifestyle is highly dependent on willpower. You cannot teach willpower in schools, however you can make a kid feel self-conscious by publicly explaining how there are certain people who are unhealthy, which can (and has) been used to justify bashing overweight people.

    Only the kids with the willpower to change or continue this lifestyle will find this information necessary, and so they can seek it outside of a school with the assistance of their parent or guardian, which also isn't a problem because nutrition is something both the child and the parent/guardian should learn about together. It takes a family to work on this problem.

    u5mv3v50fyfj.png
  • mynameisguidomynameisguido Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    That health education is poor in our country is simply symptomatic of larger educational issues, ultimately. Until there are serious strides to improve education in general, even talking about how to improve health/nutrition/physical education doesn't matter much.

    steam_sig.png
  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    Well, let's just say I disagree.

    I'm not talking about "man let's make those fat kids lose weight" I'm talking about let's at least give kids the tools to recognize (right now or gasp! later in life when they buy their own food) what are healthy eating habits and what aren't.

    I believe this is appropriate for school curriculum and you don't, so I guess that's that. Insofar as you base your opinion on the fact "it can't work! it never worked before!" I think that's silly.

  • VariableVariable Ted Hitler Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    edited March 2009
    - nutrition could be made part of gym class from when kids are young. it would be mandatory and every kid would go through the class

    - even if the parents don't do anything, you haven't lost anything by educating these children. just because they can't use the information now doesn't mean it's not worth teaching them so they hvae it for the future (hence my algebra comparison). plus if a kid comes home with some knowledge and a textbook about being healthier, at least some parents would be willing to look into improvements that would benefit them and their child.

    - you can't make kids do anything. you can't even really make them learn any of what is taught in schools. why does that somehow apply differently to health and nutrition than any other subject? especially since health and nutrition necessarily applies to every student.

    If you think it takes a health class for fat kids to make fun of, I question whether you actually went through school. It wouldn't make that any worse whatsoever, especially with the focus being on health rather than purely weight.

    and as for your last point, only kids who are willing to work are gonna go to good colleges and get good jobs, and they can learn anything outside of school, they just have to read some books. why teach anything?

    (this is a direct response to fluffy I just didn't want to quote and chop it up)

    BNet-Vari#1998 | WiiU-Variable | 3DS-3866-8105-7478 | Steam | Twitch
    Sig%20-%20Hearthstone%20DoA.png
  • WashWash Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Medopine wrote: »
    Well, let's just say I disagree.

    I'm not talking about "man let's make those fat kids lose weight" I'm talking about let's at least give kids the tools to recognize (right now or gasp! later in life when they buy their own food) what are healthy eating habits and what aren't.

    I believe this is appropriate for school curriculum and you don't, so I guess that's that. Insofar as you base your opinion on the fact "it can't work! it never worked before!" I think that's silly.

    You're not exactly proposing a way in which it might work. You're working on the assumption that it is fixable, and giving no reasons why you think so. That to me is silly.

    The idea that it could be fixed to the degree that it overrides everything a child learns outside of school about eating, like what goes on at the dinner table, seems impossible to me. Unless these children buy and prepare their own food, in which case it might be possible. I can't imagine a 14 year old stopping to ask his parent how many calories are in the meal they've prepared.

    It can be improved, but not to the extent that it's truly effectual.

    u5mv3v50fyfj.png
  • programjunkieprogramjunkie Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    jeepguy wrote: »
    Fallingman wrote: »
    Something I've noticed in people's posts - is a really strong slant towards exercise specifically for being fit.

    I'll admit that I've always been fairly fit - but until I grew older - I never 'exercised' per se. But what I did do, was play sports... A lot of sports. I played football (soccer), rugby, basketball, tennis, martial arts etc. I rode a bike everywhere because my parents expected it of me (never got a lift), I spent my days swimming at the beach and when we got older - started surfing.

    I never once thought about that I did as 'exercise' because I enjoyed every second of it. Even if my friends didn't play any sports, they still played outside and rode bikes.

    My point is that I've seen kids gyms. I remember having to run at school. But if you want a kid to be more active, then get them involved in something that they enjoy.


    Everyone should exercise but if you are obese it's not an exercise issue, it's a calorie issue. You need to eat fewer calories. The easiest way to do this without feeling really hungry all the time is to determine which foods in your diet are the most calorie rich and replace them with filling but lower calorie fare. Eat the salad. Skip the dressing. It's good for you.

    Skipping soda (or pop or coke or fizzy drinks or whatever the fuck you call it) is probably one of the most important if you are a big soda drinker. Cutting one 20 oz soda a day will make you lose (or not gain, anyways) like 2 pounds per month.

    Ideally almost all of your fluid intake should be ice cold water*, but having a little diet soda, black coffee or tea, or some juice (being mindful juice is high in calories compared to actually fruit, so it counts as a treat and not as good for you) is fine.

    This obviously applies more to sedentary people, rather than someone who does physical activity all day. Still, it's ridiculously easy to cut weight with minor changes.

    * If the water is cold enough, it actually has a negative caloric value due to the energy required to heat it. I think it's like 100 calories burned per gallon of ice water.

    Metabolically, and hydratively, the only two things that really matter are "Does it have sugar" and "does it have caffiene" - "colored" drinks hydrate you just fine, as do diet sodas, and caffiene is actually good for short term weight loss - the amount in soda has more value as a stimulant then penalty as a diuretic.

    There was some research indicating diet soda may be an hunger stimulant which at least partially negates its other value, though I believe currently there isn't a strong consensus either way.

    Still, I don't mean to suggest any diet ought to be perfect. If you're starting off from terrible like I did, even making the most minor of concessions can have a big impact.
    And the temperature thing, at a comfortable cold drinking temp you're talking maybe 5-10 calories difference

    Comfortable is 32 degrees with ice crystals starting to form, what are you talking about? :P

  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    I'm not saying it could be fixed "to the degree it overrides everything the child learns outside of school about eating" I'm saying it's worthless to not even try to improve nutrition education and fitness classes in our education system

    You're ignoring my and variable's points about giving kids tools to use later, and helping them think differently about food, even though at that particular point in their life they may not have the most control about what foods they are offered

    And despite what you say kids DO get to pick some of what they eat, say by bringing lunch money to school, or mom asking them what they want to order at the restaurant

  • CorvusCorvus Winter crow VancouverRegistered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm not saying it could be fixed "to the degree it overrides everything the child learns outside of school about eating" I'm saying it's worthless to not even try to improve nutrition education and fitness classes in our education system

    You're ignoring my and variable's points about giving kids tools to use later, and helping them think differently about food, even though at that particular point in their life they may not have the most control about what foods they are offered

    And despite what you say kids DO get to pick some of what they eat, say by bringing lunch money to school, or mom asking them what they want to order at the restaurant

    Also, by manipulating their parents. As anyone who has spent time at a dinner table with small children recently can tell you. :P

  • Triple BTriple B Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Variable wrote: »
    lots of good points

    The idea that "you can't make kids do anything" is utterly pivotal in this entire debate. If kids don't want to, then they're damn well not going to. It's really as simple as that. I've yet to see a promotional video or a PSA that makes exercise look fun. I think it's more of a matter that we just haven't figured it all out yet. We're getting there, though. As has been mentioned in this thread, America is slowly but surely working on slimming down, what with fast food joints changing their menus, etc. I think we're headed in the right direction, but I think we could do more to make it easier for people to access the means to get in shape. I'm not just talking about "go for a walk fatty", I mean like...exercise machines. Gyms. Facilities like that. Places that people will make an effort to go to, and do it on a regular basis. There's more these places could be doing to get people to go, and there's also more places we could be putting these facilities.

    Also, on an unrelated note, your sig reminds me of Joe Pantoliano.

    steam_sig.png
  • WashWash Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Variable wrote: »
    - nutrition could be made part of gym class from when kids are young. it would be mandatory and every kid would go through the class

    Dividing up gym class isn't the way to adequately teach nutrition. Covering enough subject matter to enforce a healthier lifestyle would require probably a class of its own. If we're talking about enforcing every kid with a healthier lifestyle, it would need to be mandatory, 'cause given the choice I'd bet more kids would choose a class that was relevant to what they think they want to do career-wise.
    Variable wrote:
    - even if the parents don't do anything, you haven't lost anything by educating these children. just because they can't use the information now doesn't mean it's not worth teaching them so they hvae it for the future (hence my algebra comparison). plus if a kid comes home with some knowledge and a textbook about being healthier, at least some parents would be willing to look into improvements that would benefit them and their child.

    Some children might retain this information. Some parents might do what you said they might do. I think if a kid wanted to change their lifestyle, and had parents willing to help them, this wouldn't be necessary, and in the process of working towards their goal they'd come across more valuable information than what they'd get from a class.
    Variable wrote:
    - you can't make kids do anything. you can't even really make them learn any of what is taught in schools. why does that somehow apply differently to health and nutrition than any other subject? especially since health and nutrition necessarily applies to every student.

    It doesn't. It does help my point that it's ineffectual, though.
    Variable wrote:
    If you think it takes a health class for fat kids to make fun of, I question whether you actually went through school. It wouldn't make that any worse whatsoever, especially with the focus being on health rather than purely weight.

    I've seen it used as a justification. Fat people being treated as inferior because it's unhealthy to be fat. You're right, being mocked because of weight's bad either way, but that some people feel they can justify their mockery is just irritating.
    Variable wrote:
    and as for your last point, only kids who are willing to work are gonna go to good colleges and get good jobs, and they can learn anything outside of school, they just have to read some books. why teach anything?

    (this is a direct response to fluffy I just didn't want to quote and chop it up)

    School is necessary for future employment. Nutrition (unless you intend to be a nutritionalist) is not necessary for future employment. While certain levels of physical fitness may be a requirement for certain jobs (military, fire dept., etc), those jobs do not require a degree. Kids who get into good colleges and get good jobs get them because of grades. A healthy lifestyle does not share the same requirements.

    u5mv3v50fyfj.png
  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    you know we're talking about this stuff from elementary through high school right

  • DuffelDuffel Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Schools wouldn't even need to teach nutrition that much if they just practiced what they preached and served very healthy foods in the cafeteria, and actually made those foods edible.

    When I went to my public school, we usually had "pizza" once a week. Said pizza was placed in a little bowl-like carton, and was bowed in the middle, like a pool table that gets wet. It was so greasy that there was usually about a tablespoon (I am not exxagerating at all) of pure grease that had sweated out of the surface of the pizza and collected in the gap. We had to swab them off with napkins before we could eat them.

    There's no way in hell that shit was healthy. Granted, it's not the worst school lunches I've ever heard of - that would go to my cousin's school, where it was actually not unheard for your food to have roaches in it - but it was definitely too unhealthy to give to school kids.

    If the cafeterias would give decent-tasting, healthy foods - vegetables, fresh fruit, a sparing use of meat - I'd be willing to bet that it would have an effect on the way they chose to eat at home. When I was a little kid I was a big milk drinker (like, a gallon a day), and the only kind of milk I could stand was whole milk. They eventually stopped stocking that at school, only giving us 2%, and while I hated it at first, I got used to it and soon I began to prefer it. So, nutrition information is important - but it's probably more important for the parents than the kids, because the kids don't buy their own groceries.

  • WashWash Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm not saying it could be fixed "to the degree it overrides everything the child learns outside of school about eating" I'm saying it's worthless to not even try to improve nutrition education and fitness classes in our education system

    You're ignoring my and variable's points about giving kids tools to use later, and helping them think differently about food, even though at that particular point in their life they may not have the most control about what foods they are offered

    And despite what you say kids DO get to pick some of what they eat, say by bringing lunch money to school, or mom asking them what they want to order at the restaurant

    I've said repeatedly that the information taught would only be useful after. I've also stated that such information, if desired, could be sought after later, from better, varied sources.

    Upgrading a nutrition class would cost money, so ya, it's definitely worth something. The class wouldn't do much at all, but it would cost a pretty penny. Let's do that instead of putting that money into programs that would bear sweeter fruit.
    Medopine wrote:
    you know we're talking about this stuff from elementary through high school right

    You think some elementary school kid's going to retain this information up until the point he/she can implement it? I seriously doubt it. Nutrition isn't like riding a bike.

    u5mv3v50fyfj.png
  • DuffelDuffel Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    That's why you keep reinforcing it.

  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    Duffel wrote: »
    That's why you keep reinforcing it.

    don't bother, he just doesn't believe it can work, so yeah, I think we're done here

  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited March 2009
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm not saying it could be fixed "to the degree it overrides everything the child learns outside of school about eating" I'm saying it's worthless to not even try to improve nutrition education and fitness classes in our education system

    You're ignoring my and variable's points about giving kids tools to use later, and helping them think differently about food, even though at that particular point in their life they may not have the most control about what foods they are offered

    And despite what you say kids DO get to pick some of what they eat, say by bringing lunch money to school, or mom asking them what they want to order at the restaurant

    I've said repeatedly that the information taught would only be useful after. I've also stated that such information, if desired, could be sought after later, from better, varied sources.

    Upgrading a nutrition class would cost money, so ya, it's definitely worth something. The class wouldn't do much at all, but it would cost a pretty penny. Let's do that instead of putting that money into programs that would bear sweeter fruit.

    Why would we do that? As you said, if kids don't want to learn something, they won't. That's why we should only teach candy, because basic self control is overrated.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Corvus wrote: »
    jeepguy wrote: »
    Yeah I really don't know what's up with our portions. I liked the servings of food that restaurants served in other countries I visited better. I actually had room for desert after eating my dinner!

    Even between Canada and the USA, I find portions at restaurants in the USA are bigger, and ours are too big in Canada to start with.

    The "clean your plate" thing is probably a legacy of the Great Depression and WWII. Those of us somewhat older forumers, our grandparents will have lived through that, and our parents may have lived in places with food shortages during or after WWII. Food Rationing in the UK continued until 1954, for example.

    So, that cultural impact of real food shortages is being passed on as family traditions many decades later when its doing us real harm.

    Hitler, still fucking with us from beyond the grave.
    Dividing up gym class isn't the way to adequately teach nutrition. Covering enough subject matter to enforce a healthier lifestyle would require probably a class of its own. If we're talking about enforcing every kid with a healthier lifestyle, it would need to be mandatory, 'cause given the choice I'd bet more kids would choose a class that was relevant to what they think they want to do career-wise.

    I'm curious, is P.E in America a class where everybody just goes and does some arbitrary physical exercise with minimal explanation about why you're doing it? Because down in in Australia what you're saying is impossible is basically what we have, P.E was divided between practical classes with the 'go for a bloody run' aspect of it and theory classes with the information about proper dietary and healthy lifestyle choices.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • bombardierbombardier mr. mully Vancouver, BCModerator mod
    edited March 2009
    As someone who is attracted to larger women, my whole stance on this issue would lie very closely to what Triple B said.

    There are unattractive people of all sizes. I get very irritated when people assume that fat != attractive. This is important because I find a lot of the negativity towards overweight people is due to this general consensus. Like someone else has said, being overweight has become one of the last few acceptable traits that it is widely accepted and encouraged to be made fun of. I am in support of making this something that no longer is. It affects people I know and love, and also myself.

    I have mixed feelings on whether overweight people should be given rights similar to those with obvious illness and disease. People here can attest that your weight is certainly something you can change, but I know that for some (a minority of) people it is not possible or something that is very difficult to do. By giving those very few people rights, you would have to give everyone them. That, I would have a problem with since those undeserving of the rights would obviously abuse them, but it doesn't really leave a simple answer to this issue.
    Spoiler:

  • KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Treating overweight people as some special class of citizen like say a blind person is stupid.

    Treating overweight people like shit because you think their weight gives you a free pass to act like dick is also stupid.

    Is that so hard to suss out?

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    Kagera wrote: »
    Treating overweight people as some special class of citizen like say a blind person is stupid.

    Treating overweight people like shit because you think their weight gives you a free pass to act like dick is also stupid.

    Is that so hard to suss out?

    yes because stuff

  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited March 2009
    bombardier wrote: »
    As someone who is attracted to larger women, my whole stance on this issue would lie very closely to what Triple B said.

    There are unattractive people of all sizes. I get very irritated when people assume that fat != attractive. This is important because I find a lot of the negativity towards overweight people is due to this general consensus. Like someone else has said, being overweight has become one of the last few acceptable traits that it is widely accepted and encouraged to be made fun of. I am in support of making this something that no longer is. It affects people I know and love, and also myself.

    I have mixed feelings on whether overweight people should be given rights similar to those with obvious illness and disease. People here can attest that your weight is certainly something you can change, but I know that for some (a minority of) people it is not possible or something that is very difficult to do. By giving those very few people rights, you would have to give everyone them. That, I would have a problem with since those undeserving of the rights would obviously abuse them, but it doesn't really leave a simple answer to this issue.
    Spoiler:

    Triple B said that it's perfectly fine to lack basic self control because you were raised by wolves, and that we should show compassion to those who are immobile because not biting something near their mouth is too hard.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    necroSYS wrote: »
    But I also know enough about human physiognomy and exercise science to know that obesity is not a "valid lifestyle choice". If you want to be fat, fine. But don't expect society (which has to absorb most of the externalized costs of your choice) to love you for it.

    What if you are trying to lose weight, but would prefer not to be treated like shit by people just because you haven't yet met their expectations?

    I can't remember the last time anyone treated me like shit for being fat, and I'm over 300 (working on fixing that, but still). Most people I've met would never said one word about it past say, high school age.

  • ZimmydoomZimmydoom Registered User
    edited March 2009
    Corvus wrote: »
    Medopine wrote: »
    I'm not saying it could be fixed "to the degree it overrides everything the child learns outside of school about eating" I'm saying it's worthless to not even try to improve nutrition education and fitness classes in our education system

    You're ignoring my and variable's points about giving kids tools to use later, and helping them think differently about food, even though at that particular point in their life they may not have the most control about what foods they are offered

    And despite what you say kids DO get to pick some of what they eat, say by bringing lunch money to school, or mom asking them what they want to order at the restaurant

    Also, by manipulating their parents. As anyone who has spent time at a dinner table with small children recently can tell you. :P

    Small children have more of an impact on a family's grocery list than any other single family member. That's why junkfood marketing targets elementary and middle-school kids primarily, because it fucking works and gets them hooked young, before they start noticing boys/girls and worrying about how they look.

    Fuzzy, you're being really, really thick in here. Medo's suggestions are perfectly reasonable and have not been tested sufficiently for you to be so adamantly dismissive of what is a really good set of ideas.

    Better-than-birthday-sig!
    Spoiler:
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    I'm curious, is P.E in America a class where everybody just goes and does some arbitrary physical exercise with minimal explanation about why you're doing it?

    This describes, precisely, what "physical education" was for me, in California public schools, in the late 80s and early 90s. And I don't think my experience was uncommon.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • MedopineMedopine __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    I'm curious, is P.E in America a class where everybody just goes and does some arbitrary physical exercise with minimal explanation about why you're doing it?

    This describes, precisely, what "physical education" was for me, in California public schools, in the late 80s and early 90s. And I don't think my experience was uncommon.

    we learned and played sports and had weightlifting class in high school

    in elementary school and middle school we did those president's fitness test things

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    I'm curious, is P.E in America a class where everybody just goes and does some arbitrary physical exercise with minimal explanation about why you're doing it?

    This describes, precisely, what "physical education" was for me, in California public schools, in the late 80s and early 90s. And I don't think my experience was uncommon.
    Pretty much. I went to a nice school for middle school that actually had a fitness class, so we learned about nutrition and so on in there. After that I went to a regular high school and all we did was walk around the black top four times then hang out until next period.

    PSN: allenquid
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Feral wrote: »
    necroSYS wrote: »
    But I also know enough about human physiognomy and exercise science to know that obesity is not a "valid lifestyle choice". If you want to be fat, fine. But don't expect society (which has to absorb most of the externalized costs of your choice) to love you for it.

    What if you are trying to lose weight, but would prefer not to be treated like shit by people just because you haven't yet met their expectations?

    I can't remember the last time anyone treated me like shit for being fat, and I'm over 300 (working on fixing that, but still). Most people I've met would never said one word about it past say, high school age.

    I suspect it is a little easier being a fat man than being a fat woman.

    I haven't been demeaned for being chubby since I was a child. However, I've dated a few chubby girls and I have seen how they do get demeaned, with alarming regularity.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • DuffelDuffel Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    In our high school PE class you were required to do two things: change clothes, and "participate". The latter was pretty nebulous - could be anything from playing basketball to running to badminton to whatever - as long as you were visible and moving. I took advantage of the basketball team's (shitty) weight benches. It was alright, although I wish I'd stayed at it more than I did.

  • Triple BTriple B Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Scalfin wrote: »
    bombardier wrote: »
    As someone who is attracted to larger women, my whole stance on this issue would lie very closely to what Triple B said.

    There are unattractive people of all sizes. I get very irritated when people assume that fat != attractive. This is important because I find a lot of the negativity towards overweight people is due to this general consensus. Like someone else has said, being overweight has become one of the last few acceptable traits that it is widely accepted and encouraged to be made fun of. I am in support of making this something that no longer is. It affects people I know and love, and also myself.

    I have mixed feelings on whether overweight people should be given rights similar to those with obvious illness and disease. People here can attest that your weight is certainly something you can change, but I know that for some (a minority of) people it is not possible or something that is very difficult to do. By giving those very few people rights, you would have to give everyone them. That, I would have a problem with since those undeserving of the rights would obviously abuse them, but it doesn't really leave a simple answer to this issue.
    Spoiler:

    Triple B said that it's perfectly fine to lack basic self control because you were raised by wolves, and that we should show compassion to those who are immobile because not biting something near their mouth is too hard.

    I'm not sure PA is the right place for someone like you. Perhaps try 4cha....chairs. Yes. Try 4 chairs and pick which one suits you best.

    steam_sig.png
  • KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Medopine wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    Treating overweight people as some special class of citizen like say a blind person is stupid.

    Treating overweight people like shit because you think their weight gives you a free pass to act like dick is also stupid.

    Is that so hard to suss out?

    yes because stuff

    This is why I hate stuff.

    It can get stuffed for all I care.
    Spoiler:

    How about federal funding for summer camps for the obese youth? Or even just summer camps in general.

    I think it would be good to better promote kids getting outside for a few weeks during time off school.

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    WRT fat people being a "protected class:"

    I think it's important to understand the motivations behind such proposals.

    There's evidence that there is a wage gap between overweight people and normal weight people. They can face discrimination in education. Doctors give less time to overweight and obese patients.

    The proposals to define fat people as a protected class are an effort to curb these forms of discrimination. Whether or not they have a snowball's chance of hell of succeeding is of no interest to me - they might, on the local level, be able to get anti-fat-discrimination language written into municipal law as in San Francisco - but rather that it is a genuine attempt to fight a very real problem.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    I'm going to add my support for the "assholes are bad, but so is being overweight" side.

  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited March 2009
    Kagera wrote: »
    Medopine wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    Treating overweight people as some special class of citizen like say a blind person is stupid.

    Treating overweight people like shit because you think their weight gives you a free pass to act like dick is also stupid.

    Is that so hard to suss out?

    yes because stuff

    This is why I hate stuff.

    It can get stuffed for all I care.
    Spoiler:

    How about federal funding for summer camps for the obese youth? Or even just summer camps in general.

    I think it would be good to better promote kids getting outside for a few weeks during time off school.
    You know, I'm for federally funding a lot of programs, but "not being fat" isn't one of them. I would, however, support federal funding for a monitor that would follow every obese person around, and slap 80% of the food they eat out of their hands.

    h1DI1.jpg
    All my fuckin life I lived a normal fuckin life
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2009
    I suppose I'm just being a stupid government-hating anarchist or something but it seems to me that trying to solve this through policy and legislation is probably a poor approach. Sure, most of us here seem to get that conceptually we're trying to undo institutionalized unhealthiness of lifestyle expectations and whatnot, but in practice most of the people who are looking to be loud dicks to people are going to read it as "fat people are illegal so now I'm extra-justified in being a dick to them". Yes there are things that government can do to help like providing better health education and perhaps re-evaluating the design of PE classes, as well as providing penalties and incentives to encourage production and wider distribution of healthier food. But you're not going to be able to make a law that will turn fat people skinny, and really that shouldn't be the objective so much as to get all people to lead healthier lifestyles. That seems like something that has to happen on an interpersonal level. Going out and getting drunk at a bar Friday night with your friends versus maybe going hiking/camping for two days with your friends. Stuff like that. Not really things that can be forced I guess but if we really feel it has to be forced you guys all think as little of humanity as I do, and at that point why be bothered by people dying of heart-disease? Maybe some kind of grass-roots health movement or something? I mean I know that's pretty much terrorism since it's not funded by the Fed or Kraft, but, meh, kitty wants to be petted, I'm going to sleep.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • Kate of LokysKate of Lokys Registered User
    edited March 2009
    What gets me about this debate is always the "OH NOES TEH FATTIES ARE EATING UP ALL OF OUR HEALTH CARE MONIES WITH THEIR GIANT ALL-DEVOURING MOUTHS."

    Sure, obesity is fairly firmly linked to increases in heart problems, etc. But last time I checked, tobacco was linked to various cancers, alcohol was linked to liver issues (among other things), and driving a motorcycle? That shit will straight-up kill you. Yet in the countless variations on "oh man I got so drunk last night and did this CUH-RAAAAZY shit" stories people relate in the Strange/Embarrassing/Awesome Moments threads, I don't think I've ever seen anybody say "You alcohol abusers are so fucking irresponsible, that all-night binge probably shortened your life by six months and added $4,000 to our future health care costs, it's your stupid drunken fault that you didn't have the willpower to refrain from making a choice that hurts everybody else!" Similarly, we've had threads about riding motorcycles, but I don't recall any thread-crashers in there screaming "How dare you jack up health care costs for everyone else by riding your stupid donorcycle, I hope you don't take anyone else with you when you get into a horrible accident and waste thousands of dollars of taxpayer money in the ER before you die!"

    But man, as soon as somebody's just fat, it's their fault and their choice and they're ruining our health care system singlehandedly and God, it's just so unfair that us Greek-god-bodied taxpayers need to foot the quadruple bypass bill so Fatty McLardass can keep shoving entire pounds of bacon into his mouth, abloo bloo bloo.

    You can jack up my mother's taxes because she's a fat middle-aged smoker right after you increase your own because you're a hard-drinking fast-driving college boy who thinks he's immortal. Or, you can just accept the fact that different people are drains on the system in different ways.

    I'm here to tell you about voting. Imagine you're locked in a huge underground nightclub filled with sinners, whores, freaks and unnameable things that rape pit bulls for fun. And you ain't allowed out until you all vote on what you're going to do tonight [. . .] So you vote for television, and everyone else, as far as your eye can see, votes to fuck you with switchblades. That's voting. You're welcome.
145791062
This discussion has been closed.