Options

Can [Fat Acceptance] Be Positive?

1235727

Posts

  • Options
    kedinikkedinik Captain of Industry Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    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.

    Feral said calorie counting theoretically works, but in practice it's difficult to get your counts right

    I agreed with him and proposed an alternative that I think is a bit easier to use, but no magic bullet either

    You're reading a lot of malice into my posts that just isn't there

    kedinik on
    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    Feral wrote:
    How long will she keep it off?
    Most people who lose weight through diet and exercise find that they gain back most of the weight they've lost within a year even if they continue to adhere to their lifestyle regimen.

    This is one of the key points of HAES and is discussed in the Linda Bacon article.

    The notion that yo-yo dieting is primarily due to "backsliding" rather than involuntary homeostatic acclimation to reduced caloric intake is a myth that needs to diaf.

    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
    Feral wrote: »
    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.

    Yeah, I know

    But is this common

    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    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.

    Yeah, I know

    But is this common

    Yes. It is common. It is ubiquitous.

    It is so common that there isn't a single peer-reviewed study that shows otherwise given a timeframe of more than a year.

    And I've looked.

    The net weight loss is typically nonzero (maybe 2% or 3% of gross body weight) but behavioral regimens that can reliably maintain 10% or more of body mass loss for a year or a more literally do no exist. And not because of behavioral backsliding, but because of homeostatic acclimation.

    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
    Feral wrote: »
    Feral wrote:
    How long will she keep it off?
    Most people who lose weight through diet and exercise find that they gain back most of the weight they've lost within a year even if they continue to adhere to their lifestyle regimen.

    This is one of the key points of HAES and is discussed in the Linda Bacon article.

    The notion that yo-yo dieting is primarily due to "backsliding" rather than involuntary homeostatic acclimation to reduced caloric intake is a myth that needs to diaf.

    I guess I'd need to read some papers on this; it doesn't jive with my own experiences hardly at all

    I know when I'm about to regain a significant chunk of weight mid-diet, because in fact I've skipped runs, and I've eaten extra ice cream for a few days, and I've gorged on snacks at 2AM, and then sure enough I gain about 5 pounds

    I suspect it's pretty hard to control for embarrassed people lying to researchers; my dad swears up and down to my mom that he sticks to his diet and exercise regime, but he'll admit to me when she's not around that, yeah, he devoured half a tray of brownies after she fell asleep, and snacks on the potato chips when she runs errands, etc etc

    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    kedinik wrote: »
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    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.

    Feral said calorie counting theoretically works, but in practice it's difficult to get your counts right

    I agreed with him and proposed an alternative that I think is a bit easier to use, but no magic bullet either

    You're reading a lot of malice into my posts that just isn't there

    My apologies then. It's just difficult to keep track because the tangent started as a response to a comparison between deaf pride and fat pride, with the idea that being fat is a choice because you could obviously just eat less. Which I think is rediculous, and was trying to argue against.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    The twin snakes of this discussion - the logistical and physiologal difficulties and attendant health concerns of fat gain/loss vs beauty standards 100% need to be uncoiled and separated. There is absolutely no benefit in acting as if they are related.

    Also the argument that people do or do not find fatness attractive being due to conscious health concerns is and always has been an attempt to validate their aesthetic concerns while also trying to appear less mean.

  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

  • Options
    kedinikkedinik Captain of Industry Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Feral wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    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.

    Yeah, I know

    But is this common

    Yes. It is common. It is ubiquitous.

    It is so common that there isn't a single peer-reviewed study that shows otherwise given a timeframe of more than a year.

    And I've looked.

    The net weight loss is typically nonzero (maybe 2% or 3% of gross body weight) but behavioral regimens that can reliably maintain 10% or more of body mass loss for a year or a more literally do no exist. And not because of behavioral backsliding, but because of homeostatic acclimation.

    Well, I mean

    It exists; I've seen it; it's hard

    kedinik on
    I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    What does or does not rev your engine is neither a reason for you to be judged, nor you to judge them.

    Acceptance is not about encouraging others to find them attractive, it's about encouraging them to fell less shame and self loathing, and for others not to not bust their balls about it.

  • Options
    knitdanknitdan In ur base Killin ur guysRegistered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    Not in and of itself, no.

    The problem comes in, I think, when people go out of their way to loudly declare how much they don't find [x] attractive.

    Or when they decide it's a good idea to give unsolicited and unwanted advice on how the people they're so disgusted by can become more desirable to random strangers.

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
  • Options
    Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    What does or does not rev your engine is neither a reason for you to be judged, nor you to judge them.

    Acceptance is not about encouraging others to find them attractive, it's about encouraging them to fell less shame and self loathing, and for others not to not bust their balls about it.
    That's true ish from the etymological roots of the term.

    In terms of the truth on the ground the movement contains both that and those who would label not finding fat people attractive as fatphobic et al.

    Of course, as scheck points out this might be inevitable (and, if you are so inclined, appropriate) given how ingrained our reactions to attractiveness are*.

    *but also, possibly a fool's errand by the same logic

  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    Not in and of itself, no.

    The problem comes in, I think, when people go out of their way to loudly declare how much they don't find [x] attractive.

    Or when they decide it's a good idea to give unsolicited and unwanted advice on how the people they're so disgusted by can become more desirable to random strangers.

    Yeah I mean, being a silly goose about why you think someone is ugly is never excusable.

  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    Not in and of itself, no.

    The problem comes in, I think, when people go out of their way to loudly declare how much they don't find [x] attractive.

    Or when they decide it's a good idea to give unsolicited and unwanted advice on how the people they're so disgusted by can become more desirable to random strangers.

    Yeah I mean, being a silly goose about why you think someone is ugly is never excusable.

    I think the more pertinent question is the reverse though. If other people are talking about how attractive fat people are, is there any need for you to step in and prevent it? Because some people argue that being Fat is unhealthy and therefore shouldn't be lauded as attractive. Hence the titular question, "positive or dangerous?"

    "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
    syndalis wrote: »
    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.

    So, they'll die of starvation and still be overweight, is what I'm hearing.

    So, we give them 100% of daily nutrients in a 200 calorie paste and they'll still starve?

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Apothe0sis wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    What does or does not rev your engine is neither a reason for you to be judged, nor you to judge them.

    Acceptance is not about encouraging others to find them attractive, it's about encouraging them to fell less shame and self loathing, and for others not to not bust their balls about it.
    That's true ish from the etymological roots of the term.

    In terms of the truth on the ground the movement contains both that and those who would label not finding fat people attractive as fatphobic et al.


    Of course, as scheck points out this might be inevitable (and, if you are so inclined, appropriate) given how ingrained our reactions to attractiveness are*.

    *but also, possibly a fool's errand by the same logic

    This just feels like kink shaming. Even if true in some cases, expecting people to conciously update their sexual preferences is a bridge too far.

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    So, just for my own clarity:

    Once you're fat you just may as well give up on trying not to be, if that's what you're about, because it's practically impossible.

    Don't bother watching what you eat, because counting calories and nutrients is practically impossible.

    You'll never suffer ill effect from being severely obese.

    I mean, that seems to be the general sentiment here

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    OremLKOremLK Registered User regular
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    Not in and of itself, no.

    The problem comes in, I think, when people go out of their way to loudly declare how much they don't find [x] attractive.

    Or when they decide it's a good idea to give unsolicited and unwanted advice on how the people they're so disgusted by can become more desirable to random strangers.

    Yeah I mean, being a silly goose about why you think someone is ugly is never excusable.

    I think the more pertinent question is the reverse though. If other people are talking about how attractive fat people are, is there any need for you to step in and prevent it? Because some people argue that being Fat is unhealthy and therefore shouldn't be lauded as attractive. Hence the titular question, "positive or dangerous?"

    idk, I think a loud conversation about what kind of a person gives you a huge boner is kind of gross regardless. But all in all, nah if folks think fat people are hot, it's w/e to me. Different strokes if you know what I mean.

  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    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.

    Yeah, I know

    But is this common

    Yes. It is common. It is ubiquitous.

    It is so common that there isn't a single peer-reviewed study that shows otherwise given a timeframe of more than a year.

    And I've looked.

    The net weight loss is typically nonzero (maybe 2% or 3% of gross body weight) but behavioral regimens that can reliably maintain 10% or more of body mass loss for a year or a more literally do no exist. And not because of behavioral backsliding, but because of homeostatic acclimation.

    are you saying that it's impossible to permanently lose weight that you've gained?

  • Options
    AridholAridhol Daddliest Catch Registered User regular
    I think it's more that losing weight for the long term is a lot harder than it's portrayed and that the best thing is to not get overweight in the first place.

    Also, it's absolutely ok/good for people to find overweight people attractive, it's not not ok for anyone else to tell someone what they can/should find attractive.
    It's no ones business what I like or what you like.


    I am enjoying this discourse in the thread but the underpinnings are still
    1. Don't be assholes to each other
    2. Be as healthy (mental,physical) as you can be in your life/circumstances


    All the rest is just window dressing :)

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    It would seem so. It's why urban people are often in better shape than rural folks, because they can walk and go places that people in the country have to drive to, and have meal choices.

    Some of the things in here are highly irresponsible to be putting forth, like watching what's in your meals being virtually useless.

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    This starts with the FDA and the absolutely insane amount of sugar we consume in this nation.

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    This starts with the FDA and the absolutely insane amount of sugar we consume in this nation.

    A huge hurdle, keeping your shopping contained to the outside of the supermarkets.

    But one that has helped me drop almost 50 pounds since last august and got me out of pre-diabetic status.

  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    This starts with the FDA and the absolutely insane amount of sugar we consume in this nation.

    Honestly this is where the health concern belongs and is useful. Regulatory bodies and preventative public policy. It is, for the most part, unhelpful choir-preaching when administered on a personal level.

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    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.

    Yeah, I know

    But is this common

    Yes. It is common. It is ubiquitous.

    It is so common that there isn't a single peer-reviewed study that shows otherwise given a timeframe of more than a year.

    And I've looked.

    The net weight loss is typically nonzero (maybe 2% or 3% of gross body weight) but behavioral regimens that can reliably maintain 10% or more of body mass loss for a year or a more literally do no exist. And not because of behavioral backsliding, but because of homeostatic acclimation.

    are you saying that it's impossible to permanently lose weight that you've gained?

    Not only that, but overeating doesnt cause people being obese.

  • Options
    BasarBasar IstanbulRegistered User regular
    Open up, foreigner who got fat in America here.

    I love this topic. Not arguing about it but rather it's a topic that fascinates me about America. Let me tell you my story.

    Back in 2000, I was an exchange student in the Midwest U.S. I remember exactly how much I weighed when I got to the U.S. because I had a physical a few months before I flew there. I was 70 kgs (~155 lbs). I was also really fit as I lived on a coastal town back home so I was basically in water probably 6-7 months of the year and was active in high school sports.

    Then I got fat. Specifically, 15 kgs (~33 lbs) heavier in 10 months.

    As an exchange student I was placed in the care of a lovely host family. They had hosted many other exchange students in the past 30 years or so. They had photos of all those other students at their home and I didn't realize it at the time but they all had gotten fat during their stay. How so?

    Well, it's a combination of many factors:

    - readily available junk food everywhere and I really mean everywhere (school had vending machine dispensing candy, wtf?),
    - consumption of junk food not just by kids but by adults as well who should instead show by example (I remember a teacher bingeing on Sour Patches),
    - a cuisine based on carbs and sugar (I never had pasta and bread for dinner at the same time back home, it was either pasta or bread with some non-carb meal),
    - acceptance of being fat starting at a young age (fat kids being in the football team as lineman, line backers, etc. and being in football team is cool),
    - geographical distances in rural U.S. pushing people to stock up on food with larger containers/portions (the town I was in had no Walmart so when we drove to one 30 miles away, we got 48 pack cans of soda, 30 pack poptarts, etc.),
    - loading up kids with excess sugar at school (got milk? well guess what, milk is full of sugar),
    - a culture in which driving is the only method of transportation (everyone in my senior year had a car and even those who lived less than a mile away drove to school),
    - parents not guiding kids to a healthy diet as they haven't seen better.

    So at the end of 10 months, I was 15 kgs heavier. My parents were shocked when I got back home (didn't have facetime at the time, lol). I quickly got back to my normal weight after getting home and didn't gain much weight on my subsequent stay in the U.S. but I think pinning down fatness or obesity on individuals is not going to help anyone get back to normal weight. America and unfortunately Americanization of the world has a huge problem and the only way to change course is through a systematic revolution of how people access junk food. American supermarkets have junk food aisles about the size of European supermarkets for f*** sake.

    Got a 40 minute walk to work now, so I'll add more about adults and their orange mocha frappucinos later :)

    i live in a country with a batshit crazy president and no, english is not my first language

  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    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.

    Yeah, I know

    But is this common

    Yes. It is common. It is ubiquitous.

    It is so common that there isn't a single peer-reviewed study that shows otherwise given a timeframe of more than a year.

    And I've looked.

    The net weight loss is typically nonzero (maybe 2% or 3% of gross body weight) but behavioral regimens that can reliably maintain 10% or more of body mass loss for a year or a more literally do no exist. And not because of behavioral backsliding, but because of homeostatic acclimation.

    are you saying that it's impossible to permanently lose weight that you've gained?

    Not only that, but overeating doesnt cause people being obese.

    I think the point being made is that simply over-eating isn't what keeps people obese. And it certainly isn't the sole cause.

  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    syndalis wrote: »
    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.

    So, they'll die of starvation and still be overweight, is what I'm hearing.

    So, we give them 100% of daily nutrients in a 200 calorie paste and they'll still starve?

    Proteins, fats, and carbohydrates differ from other nutrients just in bulk. You can't get 100% of daily nutrients from 200 calories of anything and not be in starvation mode.

    Whether or not you have much fat remaining when you die of starvation depends on how long your personal protein timer is. Your brain always needs 25% of its energy to come from sugar. Red blood cells need 100% of their energy to come from sugar. Glycogen stores in the liver can sate this for a couple days, but then the only component of the body readily able to be turned into sugar is protein - muscle. Fat is useless for this.

    Therefore, muscle protein is the true determinant of when a person dies of starvation, and if the person has a lot more fat than muscle, their brain and other organs will fail before all the fat gets digested. If they have some other medical condition - diabetes is the obvious one, followed by heart conditions - then obviously a person can die from being in starvation mode far faster than it would take to notably put a dent in their %fat by bodymass.

    What is the point of this?

    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
    spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Basar... when Bel and I moved to Ireland we were nearly 200lbs, and within a year had dropped 60lbs of that without changing our eating volume much at all... but access to fast food was almost gone. Within 2 years of returning to the US we'd gained it all back.

    our food culture is absolutely a core part of the problem.

    spool32 on
  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    So, just for my own clarity:

    Once you're fat you just may as well give up on trying not to be, if that's what you're about, because it's practically impossible.

    Don't bother watching what you eat, because counting calories and nutrients is practically impossible.

    You'll never suffer ill effect from being severely obese.

    I mean, that seems to be the general sentiment here

    Not at all. The point is that fitness, health, and body size are extremely complicated and spitting out hot takes like "calories in<calories out=weight loss" is not only unhelpful but presumptive and disparaging. Judging a persons health based on their weight is a fools errand and should be avoided at all costs.

    "The world is a mess, and I just need to rule it" - Dr Horrible
  • Options
    Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    Apothe0sis wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Hmm.

    Is there anything bad about not finding fat people attractive? Is it any different from not finding musclebound dudebros attractive or not finding marathon runners attractive or not finding short people or small boobs or hairy backs or short cocks or pasty white skin attractive, in terms of our willingness to judge?

    What does or does not rev your engine is neither a reason for you to be judged, nor you to judge them.

    Acceptance is not about encouraging others to find them attractive, it's about encouraging them to fell less shame and self loathing, and for others not to not bust their balls about it.
    That's true ish from the etymological roots of the term.

    In terms of the truth on the ground the movement contains both that and those who would label not finding fat people attractive as fatphobic et al.


    Of course, as scheck points out this might be inevitable (and, if you are so inclined, appropriate) given how ingrained our reactions to attractiveness are*.

    *but also, possibly a fool's errand by the same logic

    This just feels like kink shaming. Even if true in some cases, expecting people to conciously update their sexual preferences is a bridge too far.

    I am not of the opinion that kink shaming qua kink shaming is a real thing (or, more accurately, a thing of real moral import) but I agree that this is a gambit fraught with issues.

    That isn't to say that the logic is unclear:

    Premise 1: Overall society finds fat people unattractive
    Premise 2: People treat unattractive people badly
    Premise 3: The preferences against and reactions toward unttractive people is so ingrained it is not possible to change 2

    Thus we ought attack premise 1 and thus by the false morality/cognitive traps to which the activist left is beholden it must be a form of bigotry.

  • Options
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    This starts with the FDA and the absolutely insane amount of sugar we consume in this nation.

    I'd be interested in a sugar thread. One it's hard to find low sugar foods, but two I was listening to a podcast the other day and a doctor was on talking about how obesity and sugar intake do not actually correlate that well at a national level.

    "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
    spool32 wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    kedinik wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    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.

    Yeah, I know

    But is this common

    Yes. It is common. It is ubiquitous.

    It is so common that there isn't a single peer-reviewed study that shows otherwise given a timeframe of more than a year.

    And I've looked.

    The net weight loss is typically nonzero (maybe 2% or 3% of gross body weight) but behavioral regimens that can reliably maintain 10% or more of body mass loss for a year or a more literally do no exist. And not because of behavioral backsliding, but because of homeostatic acclimation.

    are you saying that it's impossible to permanently lose weight that you've gained?

    Not only that, but overeating doesnt cause people being obese.

    I think the point being made is that simply over-eating isn't what keeps people obese. And it certainly isn't the sole cause.

    Of course its not the sole cause, because overeating is a relative term.

    I used to pound down 3k calories a day and maintained a weight about 50-60 lbs less than I am at now, despite a massive reduction in intake. So if I still pounded down 3k calories, I'd be much heavier.

    It has taken a lot of recalibration in my diet to get myself manageable, as well as activity level. I am on a slow down slide in weight, but it's working because I'm putting effort into it and I feel better every single week.

    I am also fortunate enough to be able to feed myself correctly. That is a huge problem in this country and one I don't take lightly.

    Eating too much for your metabolism will put on pounds, no matter who you are.

  • Options
    PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    This starts with the FDA and the absolutely insane amount of sugar we consume in this nation.

    I'd be interested in a sugar thread. One it's hard to find low sugar foods, but two I was listening to a podcast the other day and a doctor was on talking about how obesity and sugar intake do not actually correlate that well at a national level.

    What was used as the definition of sugar? High glycemic index foods, many processed foods, and fruits fit in that category.

    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
    Jebus314Jebus314 Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    It would seem so. It's why urban people are often in better shape than rural folks, because they can walk and go places that people in the country have to drive to, and have meal choices.

    Some of the things in here are highly irresponsible to be putting forth, like watching what's in your meals being virtually useless.

    Nobody in here said the bolded. What you said was that the solution to being fat was obvious, eat less. Which is just as irresponsible.

    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
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    So, just for my own clarity:

    Once you're fat you just may as well give up on trying not to be, if that's what you're about, because it's practically impossible.

    Don't bother watching what you eat, because counting calories and nutrients is practically impossible.

    You'll never suffer ill effect from being severely obese.

    I mean, that seems to be the general sentiment here

    Not at all. The point is that fitness, health, and body size are extremely complicated and spitting out hot takes like "calories in<calories out=weight loss" is not only unhelpful but presumptive and disparaging. Judging a persons health based on their weight is a fools errand and should be avoided at all costs.

    Is It?

    Calories in < Calories out is a hot take? Wow. I guess my weight loss (and the weight loss of several people I know) from disciplining ourselves in diets and getting active is just a phantom byproduct of some unknown force.

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Jebus314 wrote: »
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    It would seem so. It's why urban people are often in better shape than rural folks, because they can walk and go places that people in the country have to drive to, and have meal choices.

    Some of the things in here are highly irresponsible to be putting forth, like watching what's in your meals being virtually useless.

    Nobody in hear said the bolded. What you said was that the solution to being fat was obvious, eat less. Which is just as irresponsible.

    Eat differently, not less.

    If you're eating correctly you're gonna have to jam a lot of food down your gullet for the 2k calorie target (give or take)

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    OremLKOremLK Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Basar... when Bel and I moved to Ireland we were nearly 200lbs, and within a year had dropped 60lbs of that without changing our eating volume much at all... but access to fast food was almost gone. Within 2 years of returning to the US we'd gained it all back.

    our food culture is absolutely a core part of the problem.

    Yeah, as Basar said, I think it's a combination of American food culture and American city planning, and I also feel that the two are interrelated. Fast food & stocking up on junk food at Walmart is partly a result of driving culture. Notice how in NYC, which IIRC is on average ~9lbs thinner than the US as a whole, there are no Walmarts and far fewer fast food joints per capita.

    My zombie survival life simulator They Don't Sleep is out now on Steam if you want to check it out.
  • Options
    LiiyaLiiya Registered User regular
    OremLK wrote: »
    For the vast majority of people the vast majority of the time I don't think you're going to have a lot of luck reducing obesity by shaming them OR by putting them on an exercise program OR by handing them a killer diet to try out. It is really, really hard for people to change their lifestyle by making disciplined choices for themselves. You can see this in the statistics where so many people who do lose weight just end up gaining it back within the next couple years. So shaming them or accepting them isn't going to affect the core issue here.

    I feel like the most important thing is the environmental factors at play. You put people in an environment where they have to walk ~30 minutes a day to get around instead of sitting on their asses in cars, you put them in an environment where the typical quick meal is a bowl of soup at a cafe instead of a greasy hamburger at a drive through, and you're going to get thinner, healthier people, and you aren't then having a huge cultural fight about fat shaming/acceptance because it's not such a hot button issue anymore.

    This is very true, and a rather hot topic right now because you can see the link between the rise of the car as priority in our cities and the decline of mental health and increased weight gain. Happy City by Charles Montgomery is a good book to read about happiness, mental and physical health and city design if anyone would like to read more on the subject. It mainly focuses around mental happiness, but how this and the environment has such a huge impact on our lives.

This discussion has been closed.