Options

Can [Fat Acceptance] Be Positive?

1246727

Posts

  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • Options
    CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    "If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
  • Options
    CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    One comparison I thought was pretty apt was someone pointing out that as good liberals, we see the fallacy behind the injunction for poor people to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps." We understand that if someone is poor, that doesn't necessarily mean that either made some mistake that put them there, or that it's merely a choice that's keeping them in poverty: that poverty is a complex subject and the idea of "bootstrapping" your way out oversimplifies a very complex problem.

    And yet those same liberals will turn around and try to "bootstrap" a fat person, telling them that their disease is a choice and all they have to do is choose something different for the problem to be fixed. Bootstrapping is as dumb with the complex problem of obesity as it is with the complex problem of poverty.

    "If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • Options
    CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    "If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    I still find it problematic that you want to conflate social interactions and attractiveness with someone's health. You presumably have no problem with skinny pride and yet it directly leads to things like eating disorders.

    I don't think anyone should ever feel bad about how they look. Period. We already have people making unhealthy choices in their strive to be skinny. Should humanity reverse course again and being fat becomes the ideal look, we will also have people making unhealthy choices in their strive to be fat. Neither case is better than the other. In both cases we should be completely accepting of their desire to look a certain way, while simultaneously trying to help them understand the health affects of their choices.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    DerrickDerrick Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    Steam and CFN: Enexemander
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Being fat is also something that often can't be altered or prevented. Also deafness and cancer can often be avoided (extremely loud noises, smoking). I think it is presumptuous and a hurtful to assume you know why someone is fat, especially if you are saying that the reason is laziness.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    kedinikkedinik Captain of Industry Registered User regular
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    Analogies almost always harm discourse

    It's like putting too much air in a balloon

    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    Jebus314 on
    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    Being addicted to bad eating is not something to be laughed at.

    Much like drugs, however, it should be something that people strive to overcome, and not excused.

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    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.
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Just about every time I see an analogy used in a disagreement it's because a person is either unable or too lazy to explain their point. To use an analogy is to change the context, and context is vital to understanding every unique situation.

    Being overweight is not the same as being deaf. While the deaf community certainly has some interesting facets worth discussing, the situations are quite simply not the same.

  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    No studies that not breathing causes asphyxiation either.

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    kedinikkedinik Captain of Industry Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    Well, it's still in the ballpark of being useful

    Just about anyone would lose some weight if they ate whatever they usually eat, but in smaller portions

    Or if they kept their food intake the same, but exercised more

    I don't mean that it's easy to do either of these things, but I think at least it's easier than trying to count calories

    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    Just about every time I see an analogy used in a disagreement it's because a person is either unable or too lazy to explain their point. To use an analogy is to change the context, and context is vital to understanding every unique situation.

    Being overweight is not the same as being deaf. While the deaf community certainly has some interesting facets worth discussing, the situations are quite simply not the same.

    Analogies are sometimes helpful for exactly this reason though. It's hard to change someone's preconceptions, and changing the context can sometimes help them to take a step back and evaluate why they think a certain way for this specific context.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    No studies that not breathing causes asphyxiation either.

    You're being factious but that is something that is studied. People drown and their bodies are autopsied and we know that not breathing caused them to die. Believing something is true, no matter how obvious you think it is, does not make it so. You apparently have no evidence to back up your claim, it's not that hard to believe that you could be wrong.

    I don't have time at the moment to look up studies to refute, but I will try to come back to this.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just about every time I see an analogy used in a disagreement it's because a person is either unable or too lazy to explain their point. To use an analogy is to change the context, and context is vital to understanding every unique situation.

    Being overweight is not the same as being deaf. While the deaf community certainly has some interesting facets worth discussing, the situations are quite simply not the same.

    Analogies are sometimes helpful for exactly this reason though. It's hard to change someone's preconceptions, and changing the context can sometimes help them to take a step back and evaluate why they think a certain way for this specific context.

    Or, as is the case virtually every time, result in bickering over the details of the comparison.

    Surely if someone has an issue with fat acceptance they can explain so via their actual beliefs, reasoning, and data. I imagine it would do a better job than "What if it wasn't this thing but some ofher thing."

    Quid on
  • Options
    Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    There are also practical concerns with the calories in vs calories out model which is thus:

    While it is technically true that you can simply create an ever increasing caloric deficit into weightloss functioning in society while doing so is hard as it comes with significant metabolic and psychological burdens. From having low to no energy, endemic headaches and mental fuzziness and the simply psychological toll of hunger and the constant exercise of willpower to avoid one's desires it's rarely a sustainable method of weightloss, let alone long term weightloss.

    All of the options for weight loss (though, really, what we are interested in is fat loss) come with manifest trade offs - and the best ones in particular - are generally high on the time consuming side. Which is where things really get hard society and the expectations of the modern workday present a massive middle finger to such aspirations.

    Apothe0sis on
  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    No studies that not breathing causes asphyxiation either.

    You're being factious but that is something that is studied. People drown and their bodies are autopsied and we know that not breathing caused them to die. Believing something is true, no matter how obvious you think it is, does not make it so. You apparently have no evidence to back up your claim, it's not that hard to believe that you could be wrong.

    I don't have time at the moment to look up studies to refute, but I will try to come back to this.

    So if someone never eats they'll get fat or maintain their weight?

  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    No studies that not breathing causes asphyxiation either.

    I imagine none of them end with "The person just didn't try hard enough to breath."

    I'd be very interested for you to actually back up your claim.

  • Options
    AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Just about every time I see an analogy used in a disagreement it's because a person is either unable or too lazy to explain their point. To use an analogy is to change the context, and context is vital to understanding every unique situation.

    Being overweight is not the same as being deaf. While the deaf community certainly has some interesting facets worth discussing, the situations are quite simply not the same.

    Analogies are sometimes helpful for exactly this reason though. It's hard to change someone's preconceptions, and changing the context can sometimes help them to take a step back and evaluate why they think a certain way for this specific context.

    This is what I was trying to get at. I am (slightly) more sympathetic to this attitude in the deaf community than I am to it in the fat community. Maybe that's because I'm fat and not deaf, I dunno. But I wasn't attempting to assert "this is like a car," just saying, "I feel differently about the car; what is it about the car that makes it different that's driving that feeling?"
    (no pun intended)

    ACsTqqK.jpg
  • Options
    knitdanknitdan In ur base Killin ur guysRegistered User regular
    No, sport, they'll die of malnutrition no matter how fat they are.

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    Well, it's still in the ballpark of being useful

    Just about anyone would lose some weight if they ate whatever they usually eat, but in smaller portions

    Or if they kept their food intake the same, but exercised more

    I don't mean that it's easy to do either of these things, but I think at least it's easier than trying to count calories

    There are also people who eat the same or more, work out less, and are much skinnier. And yet you would look at the fat person and presume they are more unhealthy than the skinny person, because they are lazier.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    syndalissyndalis Getting Classy On the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Products regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    No studies that not breathing causes asphyxiation either.

    You're being factious but that is something that is studied. People drown and their bodies are autopsied and we know that not breathing caused them to die. Believing something is true, no matter how obvious you think it is, does not make it so. You apparently have no evidence to back up your claim, it's not that hard to believe that you could be wrong.

    I don't have time at the moment to look up studies to refute, but I will try to come back to this.

    So if someone never eats they'll get fat or maintain their weight?

    if somebody never eats, their metabolism slows to a crawl, and the body switches over to the denser tissues leading to muscle atrophy and organ damage.

    SW-4158-3990-6116
    Let's play Mario Kart or something...
  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    I think there is a misunderstanding here. Disability societies have circles of thought in taking pride in disability: don't get cochlear implants, don't participate in bionics or stimulation research - all over the spectrum of letting society adapt to you instead of you adapting to society.

    Weight and body image are much more individualized. A healthy weight for one person might not be healthy for another person, or even the same person at a different age. Gaining or losing too much weight is harmful for anybody. Disability is usually universally standardized, while body weight may functionally vary in status between micro and macro cultures.

    I'm only in this to elucidate the differences between deafness and body weight. I bear no judgment on whether the viewpoints I describe are correct or incorrect.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • Options
    ErlkönigErlkönig Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    No studies that not breathing causes asphyxiation either.

    You're being factious but that is something that is studied. People drown and their bodies are autopsied and we know that not breathing caused them to die. Believing something is true, no matter how obvious you think it is, does not make it so. You apparently have no evidence to back up your claim, it's not that hard to believe that you could be wrong.

    I don't have time at the moment to look up studies to refute, but I will try to come back to this.

    So if someone never eats they'll get fat or maintain their weight?

    Well, if they never eat, all metabolic processes stop (i.e. death).

    However, if the person "never" eats (as in the figurative "never"), then any food that person does eat to maintain life will get stored as fat (i.e. the body is now conditioned into starvation mode and will do everything it can to keep itself going). Incidentally, this leads to loss of muscle mass (this is the first tissue to get metabolized during starvation conditions), brain tissue (second kind of tissue that gets reabsorbed), and eventual organ resorption...it will also increase lethargy (save all energy by not expending any). Our bodies are designed for one thing: self-preservation. Which means that the simple "fewer calories in and more calories out = weightloss!" doesn't hold up (because our bodies are more complicated than that...who knew!).

    This is why metabolic dieting (eating towards boosting metabolism) has gained traction. It doesn't reduce the science to easy soundbites, but rather takes the science and tries to individuate the process for each person (which, in some cases, actually calls for people to increase the frequency and calorie intake than what they had been eating prior).

    Erlkönig on
    | Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited June 2017
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    Well, it's still in the ballpark of being useful

    Just about anyone would lose some weight if they ate whatever they usually eat, but in smaller portions

    Or if they kept their food intake the same, but exercised more

    I don't mean that it's easy to do either of these things, but I think at least it's easier than trying to count calories

    Elaborate on "lose some weight."

    How much weight?

    And keep it off for how long a period of time?

    Feral on
    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.
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Part of the reason "calories out > calories in is the solution" rhetoric is so tiresome is that it's far more realistically "calories out > calories in while also dealing with external variables such as genetics, excessive work hours, child care, unending hours of advertising trying to convince people to eat, peers encouraging others to eat to be social, depression, varying metabolisms, food literally designed to be as enticing as possible, lack of healthy options based on location, poor education, political groups sabotaging health programs, physical disability, body chemistry, jobs that discourage physical activity, and a slew of other problems."

    The idea that most people don't at least deal with some of those and that different individuals are more or less susceptible to certain variables than others is nonsense to me.

    Quid on
  • Options
    kedinikkedinik Captain of Industry Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    Well, it's still in the ballpark of being useful

    Just about anyone would lose some weight if they ate whatever they usually eat, but in smaller portions

    Or if they kept their food intake the same, but exercised more

    I don't mean that it's easy to do either of these things, but I think at least it's easier than trying to count calories

    There are also people who eat the same or more, work out less, and are much skinnier. And yet you would look at the fat person and presume they are more unhealthy than the skinny person, because they are lazier.

    No, you're misunderstanding my point; I'll try to be more clear

    If a person has stabilized at a given weight, and they have fairly stable habits, and then they modify their routine to include fewer of their usual foods or more of their usual exercise, with no other changes, then their body will almost definitely stabilize at a lower weight

    If you're trying to reshape your body, I think it's easier to think this way — what do I usually do, and what changes in my routine would push me towards a desired equilibrium? — instead of estimating calories in and calories out

    kedinik on
    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    Well, it's still in the ballpark of being useful

    Just about anyone would lose some weight if they ate whatever they usually eat, but in smaller portions

    Or if they kept their food intake the same, but exercised more

    I don't mean that it's easy to do either of these things, but I think at least it's easier than trying to count calories

    There are also people who eat the same or more, work out less, and are much skinnier. And yet you would look at the fat person and presume they are more unhealthy than the skinny person, because they are lazier.

    A person with hypothyroidism can eat less than me, work out more than me, and still retain more calories than me. They're not over eating*. Their version of the complicated slurry of chemicals that we call a body is just slightly different.

    It's not particularly uncommon, either.
    Prevalence and Impact of Thyroid Disease
    More than 12 percent of the U.S. population will develop a thyroid condition during their lifetime.
    - An estimated 20 million Americans have some form of thyroid disease.
    - Up to 60 percent of those with thyroid disease are unaware of their condition.
    - Women are five to eight times more likely than men to have thyroid problems.
    - One woman in eight will develop a thyroid disorder during her lifetime.

    *(Hell, they could be under eating, what with all that working out business.)

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    CycloneRangerCycloneRanger Registered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    No, sport, they'll die of malnutrition no matter how fat they are.
    There is at least one case in which a morbidly obese man fasted for over a year under careful medical supervision. After 382 days, he achieved a normal weight. During some intervals he was given vitamin/mineral supplements.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2495396/pdf/postmedj00315-0056.pdf

  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    kedinik wrote: »
    ,
    If a person has stabilized at a given weight, and they have fairly stable habits, and then they modify their habits to include fewer of their usual foods or more of their usual exercise, then their body will almost definitely stabilize at a lower weight

    No, not necessarily.

    I mentioned this earlier in the thread and this is discussed in the TIME article in the OP and in the HAES article I linked upthread.

    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.
  • Options
    kedinikkedinik Captain of Industry Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Feral wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    ,
    If a person has stabilized at a given weight, and they have fairly stable habits, and then they modify their habits to include fewer of their usual foods or more of their usual exercise, then their body will almost definitely stabilize at a lower weight

    No, not necessarily.

    I mentioned this earlier in the thread and this is discussed in the TIME article in the OP and in the HAES article I linked upthread.

    I'm familiar with the bullet points summarized in the TIME article, and I don't think they contradict what I said? Here is my understanding of it

    When you lose weight you begin, generally, to feel more hungry, and your body gets more efficient at putting weight back on, and less efficient at shedding additional pounds

    So you would have to diet harder, and suffer more, for smaller losses of weight, and a little backsliding can set you back a lot because your famine-mode body is waiting for any chance to pile the old fat back on

    I don't think it's common, however, for someone to suddenly regain lots of weight if they are not backsliding on their diet-and-exercise regimen — not unheard of, but not common

    kedinik on
    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    kedinik wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    Well, it's still in the ballpark of being useful

    Just about anyone would lose some weight if they ate whatever they usually eat, but in smaller portions

    Or if they kept their food intake the same, but exercised more

    I don't mean that it's easy to do either of these things, but I think at least it's easier than trying to count calories

    There are also people who eat the same or more, work out less, and are much skinnier. And yet you would look at the fat person and presume they are more unhealthy than the skinny person, because they are lazier.

    No, you're misunderstanding my point; I'll try to be more clear

    If a person has stabilized at a given weight, and they have fairly stable habits, and then they modify their routine to include fewer of their usual foods or more of their usual exercise, with no other changes, then their body will almost definitely stabilize at a lower weight

    If you're trying to reshape your body, I think it's easier to think this way — what do I usually do, and what changes in my routine would push me towards a desired equilibrium? — instead of estimating calories in and calories out

    I think almost everyone will agree that exercise is important when trying to reshape your body. Eating less is probably not as helpful as you would think, but it can be useful sometimes.

    Putting aside the points feral has already made about weight loss, I think the other point I was trying to make is why are we even talking about this? In a conversation about whether or not being fat means you are unhealthy or unattractive, why are you bringing up your ideal plan for losing weight?

    It comes across as a less direct way of saying losing weight is straight forward/easy and Fat people have no excuse for being Fat/unhealthy. I disagree with the sentiment, which is why I'm arguing that it is far more complicated, but maybe you could just clarify if that is actually your point.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    That sounds nice, but as usual for complex topics, the important details are lost when you over simplify. How many calories you get from the food you eat will vary a huge amount depending on lots of factors. Your body will also do different things with the calories it gets depending on many factors. Calorie counting is not a very good way of dieting and telling someone they are overweight because they eat too much is laughable. You are not their doctor so stop presuming you understand their situation.

    There are few other ways someone can be overweight. And among those few other ways, very few people are actually afflicted with it.

    I don't believe you. I have never seen a study that suggests over eating is the leading cause of obesity.

    Since obesity is so multifactorial, I don't think there can ever be a study that answers this, so you're more or less right. Several genetic factors make your weight more or less sensitive to your diet. We can safely say, at least, that the rate of calorie loss (once macronutrient portion is taken into account) is highly variable within the population. I will grant that overeating is highly likely as one of many factors in the obese population, but overeating is not exactly a binary state - calorie excess is so hard to measure that modern studies shy away from doing this, and only they can account for the multitude of genetic and metabolomics factors being discovered all the time.

    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • Options
    Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    kedinik wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    Derrick wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    Paladin wrote: »
    Astaereth wrote: »
    I think there's a difference between fat acceptance (ie don't be dicks to fat people, don't fat shame) and fat pride (ie it is awesome that I'm fat, I should stay fat or get fatter, kids should be encouraged to be fat). I don't think fat pride is good for individuals or society.

    This is controversial though, because that's the same argument against there being deaf communities, and there are plenty of deaf people who would argue with me that they should exist and be proud. So I dunno.

    Deafness is something you can't alter or prevent

    Cochlear implants have made this much less so in recent years.

    There are deaf societies that spurn surgical solutions, but it's kind of different from encouraging people to be fat.

    I think you're hitting on the exact words that people who don't understand this topic frequently say. Letting people accept their bodies, even be proud of the bodies they have, is not the same thing as "encouraging people to be fat." It's encouraging people to be happy instead of miserable. I assure you, that every fat person you ever met is as perfectly aware of their condition as every deaf person you have ever met. You don't need to explain their bodies to them, they already know.

    When we talk about a person "taking pride in themselves", we are generally talking about someone who is doing self-care. Taking care of yourself is pretty universally a good thing. Trying to encourage people instead to feel shame in themselves has no good outcomes, and is in no way "good for society."

    There is a difference in being proud of your body and being proud of your disability. Body weight is somewhat adjustable and has an upper and lower range of health. A person who by standard definition is overweight or obese (or underweight) need not necessarily be disabled, and their pride in their body type need not be pride in their disability.

    Deafness is a disability, and pride in deafness is a pride in disability, not your own personal hearing level. Maintaining your ideal body weight is a tangible health goal. Maintaining your ideal deafness level is not.

    My purpose is not to throw shade on people who feel happy at their body weight or with their disability. I simply believe that fatness does not share all the same properties as disability and thus can be treated a little differently when it comes to analogies.

    And based on the science presented in this very thread, as well as a lifetime of my own study on the subject, I'm telling you you are incorrect.

    Calories in < Calories out and an overweight person will lose fat over time. There's caveats here and there, but those caveats are either extreme cases or highly temporary effects. A body cannot defy the laws of thermodynamics.

    This is exactly the kind of oversimplistic bullshit I thought we'd evolved beyond.

    Most people cannot record an accurate accounting of calories in. Most people cannot attain an accurate accounting of calories out. Calories out changes as a function of calories in, and a poorly understood function at that.

    Your post, while technically true (the best kind of true!), is useless and misleading.

    Well, it's still in the ballpark of being useful

    Just about anyone would lose some weight if they ate whatever they usually eat, but in smaller portions

    Or if they kept their food intake the same, but exercised more

    I don't mean that it's easy to do either of these things, but I think at least it's easier than trying to count calories

    There are also people who eat the same or more, work out less, and are much skinnier. And yet you would look at the fat person and presume they are more unhealthy than the skinny person, because they are lazier.

    No, you're misunderstanding my point; I'll try to be more clear

    If a person has stabilized at a given weight, and they have fairly stable habits, and then they modify their routine to include fewer of their usual foods or more of their usual exercise, with no other changes, then their body will almost definitely stabilize at a lower weight

    If you're trying to reshape your body, I think it's easier to think this way — what do I usually do, and what changes in my routine would push me towards a desired equilibrium? — instead of estimating calories in and calories out

    There's the rub though - can you maintain your previous levels of activity on a reduced caloric intake or increase activity on a stable intake?

    Answer: Depends!

    Apothe0sis on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    kedinik wrote: »

    I don't think it's common, however, for someone to suddenly regain lots of weight if they are not backsliding on their diet-and-exercise regimen — not unheard of, but not common

    Yes, people do regain most or all of the weight they lost even if they maintain the same behavioral regimen.

    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.
This discussion has been closed.