Fat hate speech? The role of the bystander.

[DSeid]

This issue is inspired by events within this particular GD thread but is really not specific to it, and not intended as a Pitting of any of those who posted within the thread. It is offered merely as a specific illustration of a more general problem.

Hate speech against the fat is pretty rampant and it seems to me, much more tolerated than many other kinds of hate speech.

Ignorance is one thing. (And some may disagree about what is ignorance and what is a justified belief, and that discussion would be welcome ... in a different thread.) Anytime the subject of fatness, comes up, no matter how specific the actual op, there seem to be a host of people who feel the need to offer their unsolicited "expert" advice to the obese, usually in the form of making sure that they realize how weak willed they are and how it is all their fault. If you believe that please read the last two pages of that thread before you open up a new one to promote that position. But referring to a group as "fatties", let alone "weak-assed fatties", goes clearly goes beyond ignorance and into an intent to offend, into an intent to bully.

My question however is centered not on the bully, or on the bullied, but on the bystander:

What is our ethical obligation as witnesses to hate speech or to an act of bullying? My belief is that we, by silence, implicitly endorse and enable the behavior. What think you?

[bengangmo]

Well of course this is predicated on the idea that ALL fat people have some sort of condition that prevents them from losing weight.

Which, for many things has become a bit overblown, you are violent, oh you poor puppy you must have been abused. You are fat? Oh you poor puppy you must have a disorder.

I would agree with you that the we have a duty as bystanders to protect those that we believe to be innocent, but also I believe that if we feel the "attack" is mostly true and justified then we can let it stand.

[Silvorange]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

Well of course this is predicated on the idea that ALL fat people have some sort of condition that prevents them from losing weight.

Which, for many things has become a bit overblown, you are violent, oh you poor puppy you must have been abused. You are fat? Oh you poor puppy you must have a disorder.

I would agree with you that the we have a duty as bystanders to protect those that we believe to be innocent, but also I believe that if we feel the "attack" is mostly true and justified then we can let it stand.

Just because a rude remark is true, that doesn't justify making it.

[Zoe]

Of course obese people have a disorder. If nothing else, they have an eating disorder. Your comment is ignorant.

"Innocent"? Obesity is not a matter of innocence or guilt.

I believe that if we feel the "attack" is mostly true and justified then we can let it stand.

What a sorry statement! Shouldn't your stand be based on thinking and knowledge rather than on what you "believe" that you "feel"? How would you "feel" if someone decided to attack your mother or your child or sister based on their intuitive feelings about what is "mostly true"?

What kind of will does it take to have nothing but liquids and less than 500 calories for six months? That's a strong will. I would never question that person's will power again.

What kind of courage does it take for a person to submit to surgery that kills one out of every one hundred people? I wouldn't question that person's courage again.

What do you know about the brain chemistry involved with appetite and what controls it?

What's the most weight you've ever lost at one time and kept off for more than five years? More than ten years?

Do share your vast knowledge on this subject, Silvorange. What you "believe" about how you "feel" about what is "mostly true" is of no value in a debate.

[Electric Sky]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

I would agree with you that the we have a duty as bystanders to protect those that we believe to be innocent, but also I believe that if we feel the "attack" is mostly true and justified then we can let it stand.

Smoking is indisputably hazardous to your health, and possibly to the health of those around the smoker, but I'd still say calling someone a "tar-encrusted puff machine" is rude. Calling someone a "fattie" or insinuating they are a worse human being than a thinner person is also rude, regardless of whether you feel it to be 'true and justified'.

Anyway, hate speech is a strong term, but I have heard some downright venomous attacks on fat people that I would put in that category ("disgusting fatties should all be put down", for instance, is pretty damn clearly hate speech).

The role of a bystander is...well, complex. I want to say everyone ought to stand up against hate speech of every kind, but I know that I have sat there quietly while coworkers cracked some pretty awful racist, sexist and homophobic jokes (and hell, I'm gay, so I had no excuse for not speaking up on that one). Sometimes it's hard as hell to speak up. I'd like to think outright bullying is a different matter though, and I'd step in there--I'd hope most people would, unless they think verbal abuse is a health tonic.

[Silvorange]

Originally Posted by Zoe

Do share your vast knowledge on this subject, Silvorange. What you "believe" about how you "feel" about what is "mostly true" is of no value in a debate.

I wasn't the one who said that.

[bengangmo]

Originally Posted by Silvorange

Just because a rude remark is true, that doesn't justify making it.

No it doesn't, but it also doesn't mean that we need to get on the case of the person making the remark...

[bengangmo]

Originally Posted by Zoe

Of course obese people have a disorder. If nothing else, they have an eating disorder. Your comment is ignorant.

"Innocent"? Obesity is not a matter of innocence or guilt.



What a sorry statement! Shouldn't your stand be based on thinking and knowledge rather than on what you "believe" that you "feel"? How would you "feel" if someone decided to attack your mother or your child or sister based on their intuitive feelings about what is "mostly true"?

What kind of will does it take to have nothing but liquids and less than 500 calories for six months? That's a strong will. I would never question that person's will power again.

What kind of courage does it take for a person to submit to surgery that kills one out of every one hundred people? I wouldn't question that person's courage again.

What do you know about the brain chemistry involved with appetite and what controls it?

What's the most weight you've ever lost at one time and kept off for more than five years? More than ten years?

Do share your vast knowledge on this subject, Silvorange. What you "believe" about how you "feel" about what is "mostly true" is of no value in a debate.

I said that, so don't go and blame other people.

What I see more and more, especially on this board..

someone will make a comment like "fat people eat too much"

then someone else will jump in with "but that's not fair, don't you know about blah blah blah".

I DO AGREE, that for those that are suffering from problems losing weight because of a medical condition or other reason, they deserve to be protected. I also believe we should be protecting the weak against the bully.

But I also believe that just because a comment is distasteful doesn't make it hate speech or unjustified. I know my wife is over weight and I know exactly why.

I also know that I have started gaining weight and I know exactly what I need to do to do something about it. If someone wants to call me a fat lazy arse bastard I deserve it - because I am gaining weight because I am being a lazy arse bastard.

[even sven]

I don't know. The SDMB is not the Disney Channel. It has a long history of having little tolerance for self-indulgent or self-destructive behavior, even among people with diagnosed medial problems. Anyone who has ever come in here with a "Oh my life is so bad" story is pretty quickly told to stop whining, buck up, find whatever help they need and get control of their lives.

And that is where the fat threads get derailed. It's not when they threads start, it's when people come in with defensive excuses.

[DSeid]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

Well of course this is predicated on the idea that ALL fat people have some sort of condition that prevents them from losing weight. ... I believe that if we feel the "attack" is mostly true and justified then we can let it stand.

No. It it is not predicated upon that straw man.

It is reasonable to have an intelligent discussion about the biologic predispositions to obesity (genetic and environmental, both prenatal and postnatal), about the body's strong responses that work against achieving sustained weight loss through dieting, and about how easy or difficult it is. (Again, see the last pages of that linked thread for those cites.) I am fine with a poster disagreeing with the many cites from the medical literature if they have at least read and considered them and disagree based on some critical analysis. But as pointed out, even if one is one of those posters who thinks the medical literature on this subject is crap (based on their own observed anecdotal experiences, critical analysis, or whatever), or that the cites are cherry picked (they are not), having the belief that it is easy to lose weight and that the obese are obese solely because of some character flaw or moral shortcoming, name calling is still unacceptable, and, I still maintain, silence during name calling is tacit approval of it. It usually is not tolerated in our society (at least the parts of it I see) if the name calling centers around skin color, or religion, or sexual orientation. Sometimes over political orientation. But almost always it is tolerated when it is about fatness.

Originally Posted by even sven

The SDMB is not the Disney Channel. It has a long history of having little tolerance for self-indulgent or self-destructive behavior, even among people with diagnosed medial problems. Anyone who has ever come in here with a "Oh my life is so bad" story is pretty quickly told to stop whining, buck up, find whatever help they need and get control of their lives.

And that is where the fat threads get derailed. It's not when they threads start, it's when people come in with defensive excuses.

The SDMB has a long history of having behaviors acceptable in different fora. In GQ you answer the question: period. It isn't the place to rant about your disgust of fat people or to whine about being fat or to insult people who whine any more than GD is. Open Pit threads to do those.

What I see as the SDMB culture is little tolerance for willful and arrogant ignorance, for the ignorant among us mouthing off as if they know what they are talking about and then holding onto those beliefs even when their "facts" have been shown to be false with solid evidence by just ignoring the evidence or deferring to anecdotes and their extant stereotypes over scientific studies.

I can't say that it never happens that a thread about some aspect of obesity gets derailed by a personal sob story, but I have personally seen more of the threads get derailed by those who, unsolicited, come in, no matter what the question being asked or debate being presented, to derail the discussion into a chance for them to call the obese names and offer their helpful advice about how easy it is to lose weight if only fat people were not so weak and lazy. Again, the latter is just ignorance that is easy to excuse until the cites have been provided, but the latter does not excuse the former.

bengangmo, maybe you know that you are a "lazy arse bastard" who deserves to be called that. And maybe you are. I'll take your word for it. You know you and I do not. Do you believe that because your weight issue stems from that that everyone else who is overweight or obese is the same as you? Where the Hell would I get off presuming to know that about you from the mere knowledge that you have announced on a message board that you are fat and have been unable to lose weight in any sustained fashion? Especially if you (who actually does know you) says that is not the case?

[Otara]

I agree theres an important distinction between criticising people whinging about thier lives and people heavily criticising others without any serious attempts at factual cites or empirical evidence to back up their position.

There does seem to be a greater willingness to do this with some topics than others and weight is a classic for it. If cites are offered and none returned then you have to wonder at the value of the discussion and it does seem to be more about bullying or the like rather than rational discourse. This can occur in both directions but Id say there was a pretty definite slant one way in the referenced thread.

As to what to do on the internet Im not sure. Moderation is the only real answer that I can see, so that people stick more to making a case rather than focussing on more ad hominem focussed discussion.

Otara

[Manda JO]

I remember a time when we used to throw around some pretty insulting terms for Christians on this board, but after a bunch of threads the culture really shifted and we don't do that so much any more. I think this is really a variation on an old problem--using derogatory terms for the members of a group while speaking to a member of the group but claiming that it isn't a personal attack because it wasn't directed at that specific individual, be it "fundie" or "baby-killer" or "Repugs" or whatever.

Whether or not this rises to the level of "hate speech"--and I think that rather overstates it, myself--it does absolutely, EVERY FUCKING TIME, totally derail any chance of meaningful discussion because the group using the terms is indulging in indignation instead of argument and the group described gets defensive and indignant in turn. It turns these threads into a sort of orgy of recreational outrage.

[DSeid]

Well perhaps we have different thresholds for hate speech. I'd judge "cheap Jew-boys" and "shiftless Negroes" as hate speech statements, and "lazy assed fatties" seems no different to me.

But call it bullying or even merely insulting speech if you want. The question of the op stands: does a non-response amount to tacit approval of the behavior or minimally agreement with the stereotype? Or is it better to ignore it to avoid the cycle of indignation and derailment alluded to above?

[DSeid]

Oh. bengangmo, is it only "the weak" who should "be protected against the bully"? Personally I think the issue of whether or not someone is strong enough to defend themselves is immaterial.

I'll change groups for that one: I am Jewish and I am quite able to defend myself I think. Nevertheless if there was anyone here making explicitly anti-Semitic comments I would be, minimally, disappointed by any silence in reaction from the bulk of the other posters. My lack of weakness would not release others from their social obligation to make it clear that hate speech directed against me is unacceptable behavior.

OTOH, taking that analogy, I have found that it is usually best to ignore borderline anti-Semitic comments in order to avoid any appearance of playing a "Jew card". Perhaps the same applies to "fattie" comments?

[bengangmo]

Originally Posted by DSeid

bengangmo, maybe you know that you are a "lazy arse bastard" who deserves to be called that. And maybe you are. I'll take your word for it. You know you and I do not. Do you believe that because your weight issue stems from that that everyone else who is overweight or obese is the same as you? Where the Hell would I get off presuming to know that about you from the mere knowledge that you have announced on a message board that you are fat and have been unable to lose weight in any sustained fashion? Especially if you (who actually does know you) says that is not the case?

I don't have a "weight issue" and never have. Today I am still under 80 kg (my height is about 1.72m

Just recently I bought size 36 inch trousers for the first time in my life, (I am 36) for the last 10 years before this I have worn size 33

That is why I know my weight gain is because of laziness.

On another board where I post, my sig is "all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing".

And this is something I believe, so I would normally call someone on threatening, bullying or overbearing behaviour, and I think we should.

At the same time though, absent clearly causative factors (eg: low intellect, health problems) I just don't see that calling a fat person lazy and lacking willpower is "hate speech" and to classify it as such is doing a disservice and being namby pamby about the whole issue, which does not help anybody, and infact makes us into enablers. We should be calling a spade a spade.

[villa]

Originally Posted by DSeid

Well perhaps we have different thresholds for hate speech. I'd judge "cheap Jew-boys" and "shiftless Negroes" as hate speech statements, and "lazy assed fatties" seems no different to me.

Seems "no different"? Not even a difference in degree?

Anti-fat comments probably aren't thought of as hate speech because fat people haven't been rounded up and packed into gas chambers because of their chubbiness. Or hunted down and shipped to a different continent and turned into property because of their obesity. If there were towns that hanged fat people for being there overnight, or burned McDonald's bags on their front lawns for having the temerity to live there, it might be considered hate speech to call someone a lazy assed fatty.

Hate speech is considered hate speech because of the terroristic implications it carries. The history of individual and institutionalized racism massively outweighs any kind of hardship faced by fat people. I'm an overweight redheaded guy. I'd expect a black person to kick me in the nuts if I ever tried to trivialize racism by suggesting that being called ginger was hate speech.

[Duke]

I almost started a thread like this myself.

It's a little tangential, but in all honesty I just don't understand the vehemence of replies against the overweight. The people who sow it in the GQ thread say over and over again that their reasons for doing it are because those who are overweight have "self-inflicted" problems. Yes, but the same could be said for drug addicts, alcoholics, or smokers, and one simply doesn't see the same level of hatred. Even if the alcoholic says "I don't have a drinking problem" or the smoker says "I can quit whenever I want," you don't have people jumping all over them screaming that they're "deluded" or whatever.

Hand in hand, too, there seems to be some kind of obsessiveness about anger towards the overweight that I just don't get. This was a reply I received in what I thought was a fairly innocuous post in the recent GQ thread:

Every fat person I've ever known is fat because of the types of foods they gorge on. Chips, cookies, candy, cupcakes. Sugary foods like breakfast cereal, sweet breads. Fattening comfort foods like butter, ice cream, fried chicken, hot dogs, macaroni and cheese. Full-sugar sodas. 2nd and 3d helpings of anything they want.

Why does this person need to go on and on about food? It would be like me responding to a smoker's difficulty about quitting with

Every smoker is unhealthy because of all the cigarettes they smoke. Marlboros. Kools. Parliaments. Winstons. Newports. All the unfiltereds they want. Menthols, kreteks, flavored tobacco. Two packs a day, three packs a day. Camels. Pall Malls.

Surely someone would read that and think, "Geez, Duke has a real obsession with tobacco. Why didn't he just stop after the first sentence?"

What I guess I'm trying to say is that I can understand why people are reluctant to step in here. I got attacked in that GQ thread, even though I thought what I was saying wasn't even particularly controversial.

Now, I (as well as Sleeps with Butterflies and others) called out a certain poster in that thread about his use of the term "fatties", and said poster wasn't even apologetic about that. The moderators were obviously called to the thread, since it got locked, but there was no mention of that. Are we to assume that it's OK to level a "fatty" insult at someone, even in GQ? Sad, IMHO.

[bengangmo]

But what we do tend to see a LOT of from overweight people is rationlisation and justification about how its "not my fault". Which we don't tend to see from smokers, where the more common attitude is "yes, I'm hooked, I was stupid, nobody to blame but myself".

I'm not wanting to protray this as every smoker, nor as every fat person, just that I have heard more justification from the fat.

How many of us have heard the phrase "if I even sniff food I put on weight"?
How many have heard "If I even smell a cigarette I get addicted"?

I whole heartedly agree that its the reponsibility of each of us to stand up to both bullying and hate speech. While calling people fatties can (not neccessarily will) be classed as bullying, I don't believe is "hate speech"

[DSeid]

bengangmo I once again invite you to look at the medical literature cited in that thread. Your WAG that obesity is, in most cases, due to laziness, is by all medical and scientific evidence false. It is as much an unfounded prejudicial stereotype as the cheap Jew or the shiftless Negro and so on. (Which doesn't mean that some of the obese are not lazy arsed bastards any more than no Jews are cheap and no Blacks are shiftless.)

If I understand you correctly you believe that your slight weight gain as an adult is because you are a lazy arsed bastard and that therefore as a group people who are seriously obese are also lazy arsed bastards who are well served by being called out about it. You believe that you have insight because you are lazy arsed and have gained a small amount of weight as a result.

Obviously your particular circumstance in no way informs about the circumstances that others are in, and wouldn't necessarily even if you were seriously obese.

The data, cited in that thread, is very clear. The major factors contributing to obesity, given life in a modern Western culture, are genetic predisposition and early life factors that lead to a "thrifty phenotype". Once an adult is seriously obese it is very very very difficult to change by will power and hard work alone. In the best medically supervised programs, selecting for a highly motivated subject pool, weight loss of 10% is generally as good as it gets, and success at sustaining that for 5 years is nearly nil. The fat cell is an endocrine organ and part of a system that is nearly as good at maintaining its "settling point" as our bodies are at keeping our temperature within a narrow range, or our blood sugar. These mechanisms can be overcome, but it is only possible with a huge amount of dedication, persistence, support, and an understanding that it is lifelong issue, not just a "diet". It has also clearly been shown that a nonblaming approach is much more likely to succeed than is an approach that berates under the cover of "calling a spade a spade."

villa, no I do not require a history of concentration camps for something to be hate speech. Being beat up on the playground as "a fag" or a "a fattie" is enough for me. Even verbal harrassment counts. And yes, in certain communities "gingerism" counts. Recognizing hate speech in all its forms in no way trivializes slavery or the Holocaust nor necessarily implies terrorism.

[villa]

Originally Posted by DSeid

villa, no I do not require a history of concentration camps for something to be hate speech. Being beat up on the playground as "a fag" or a "a fattie" is enough for me. Even verbal harrassment counts. And yes, in certain communities "gingerism" counts. Recognizing hate speech in all its forms in no way trivializes slavery or the Holocaust nor necessarily implies terrorism.

Well, it is good to see that you don't recognize the importance of the difference in degree. And to try to compare the oppression of homosexuals with the alleged oppression of fat people is fucking risible too.

[bengangmo]

Originally Posted by DSeid

bengangmo I once again invite you to look at the medical literature cited in that thread. Your WAG that obesity is, in most cases, due to laziness, is by all medical and scientific evidence false. It is as much an unfounded prejudicial stereotype as the cheap Jew or the shiftless Negro and so on. (Which doesn't mean that some of the obese are not lazy arsed bastards any more than no Jews are cheap and no Blacks are shiftless.)

If I understand you correctly you believe that your slight weight gain as an adult is because you are a lazy arsed bastard and that therefore as a group people who are seriously obese are also lazy arsed bastards who are well served by being called out about it. You believe that you have insight because you are lazy arsed and have gained a small amount of weight as a result.

Obviously your particular circumstance in no way informs about the circumstances that others are in, and wouldn't necessarily even if you were seriously obese.

The data, cited in that thread, is very clear. The major factors contributing to obesity, given life in a modern Western culture, are genetic predisposition and early life factors that lead to a "thrifty phenotype". Once an adult is seriously obese it is very very very difficult to change by will power and hard work alone. In the best medically supervised programs, selecting for a highly motivated subject pool, weight loss of 10% is generally as good as it gets, and success at sustaining that for 5 years is nearly nil. The fat cell is an endocrine organ and part of a system that is nearly as good at maintaining its "settling point" as our bodies are at keeping our temperature within a narrow range, or our blood sugar. These mechanisms can be overcome, but it is only possible with a huge amount of dedication, persistence, support, and an understanding that it is lifelong issue, not just a "diet". It has also clearly been shown that a nonblaming approach is much more likely to succeed than is an approach that berates under the cover of "calling a spade a spade."

villa, no I do not require a history of concentration camps for something to be hate speech. Being beat up on the playground as "a fag" or a "a fattie" is enough for me. Even verbal harrassment counts. And yes, in certain communities "gingerism" counts. Recognizing hate speech in all its forms in no way trivializes slavery or the Holocaust nor necessarily implies terrorism.

What then, is your solution? That "fat" become a dirty word like black or nigger?

That fat people be given a pass and sympathised with for the "disease" they have that they "caught" from somewhere?

I just hope that I never get a blood transfusion from a fatty, I would hate to catch fatness....

[olivesmarch4th]

DSeid, thanks for your eloquent post on this matter. It bothers me on the Straight Dope how we have to acknowledge the science only insofar as it doesn't contradict our pet prejudices. I like seeing the research all laid out like that.

Actually, Sr. Olives and I were just discussing last night how there are three major issues that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy so far has failed to address:

1. Smoking
2. Anorexia
3. Obesity

All three of these in clinical settings have proven to be especially pernicious and resistant to treatment. The current rate of successful weight-loss maintenance over a 5-year period is something like 2%.

In this New York Times segment, some of our obesity experts discuss the problem. The general consensus is: emphasizing weight is ultimately counter-productive and unhelpful. We should instead focus on reinforcing healthy behaviors.

A focus on health would emphasize adding positive behaviors rather than fixating on weight loss. It would support people in incorporating fruit and vegetables in their diet, or taking a 10- or 20-minute walk every day, or learning relaxation breathing to help manage stress. These small steps are important and achievable, while long-term weight loss, for most people, is not.

So this idea that telling people they're fat is doing them a favor is pretty much bullshit.

As for the ''bystander'' thing, I've never been very good at keeping my mouth shut when others are being bullied. The reason people get away with that shit is because they fail to receive the social censure that normally would require them to regulate their behavior. If 50 people stood up and said, ''hey, stop being a douchebag'' people would probably knock it off.

[DSeid]

So villa you think that is an error to call beating someone up "a crime" because it is different in degree than mass murder?

Once again, if you think that it is an overstatement to characterize "lazy assed fatty" as hate speech, that it is different in character than "Cheap Jew boy", that's fine, call it insulting speech for this discussion if you want. I obviously disagree as I believe both engage in hateful speech based on prejudicial stereotypes and to me that is the definition of hate speech.

bengangmo, is it so difficult to talk about a subject without intentionally using insulting words?

My solutions are pretty straightforward. Don't use insulting speech. Recognize that someone who manages to lose any significant amount of weight has achieved something admirable, even they remain clinically obese, and that those who take on healthier habits are to be supported even if significant lasting weight loss does not result. Keep our mouths shut when we don't know what the fuck we are talking about, especially regarding major health issues. And that we as a society, as parents, and for my part as part of the profession of pediatrics, do a better job of preventing adult obesity by changing the environment our children grow into adults in.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

I'm not wanting to protray this as every smoker, nor as every fat person, just that I have heard more justification from the fat.

Assume that being fat is something bad that one way or another CAN be controlled by personal choices/behaviours (not saying its easy, just saying its doable).

So, you have a problem that a person can control. Seems to me you have three ways to look at it. Nobody has an excuse, its either do or die, put up or shut up, and no one is to blame but yourself (I doubt the fat people want that interpretation). At the other extreme you have any excuse is a valid excuse. Well, IMO thats just stupid. For one, it takes the whole concept of excuse and renders it meaningless. For another, it takes a problem and declares it unfixable (yeah THAT will help things).

So, ISTM that the only realistic stance is THAT there IS a fuzzy line somewhere between "just fix it" and "I honestly can't help/control myself" where a person's excuse is either good enough or not.

I know a person who is getting slowly fatter by the day and aint doing a damn thing about it besides telling everybody that it is happening. On the flip side a few months ago I saw a very large woman at the convience store first thing in the morning. She had just bought a big sub sandwhich. She shoved that thing in her mouth like an anaconda swallowing a water buffalo. It was gone and down in moments.

I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that my first example doesnt have much(if any) of an excuse while the other person probably DOES have some serious mental/addicitive/physical/behavioral problem going on.

My beef is that IMO plenty, if not an actual majority, of people are in the first group but like to think that they are in the second group and are therefore totally blameless.

[Electric Sky]

Originally Posted by olivesmarch4th

So this idea that telling people they're fat is doing them a favor is pretty much bullshit.

I find that this gets on my nerves even more than most bullying. Go ahead and call me a fat lazy slob, but don't pretend you're doing it for my own good.

(Not that I personally ever get hassled over my weight, even though I'm "obese" by BMI standards. Being a dude means that a lot of the vitriol misses me and lands on my female friends instead. That might be getting a bit off topic though.)

Originally Posted by olivesmarch4th

As for the ''bystander'' thing, I've never been very good at keeping my mouth shut when others are being bullied. The reason people get away with that shit is because they fail to receive the social censure that normally would require them to regulate their behavior. If 50 people stood up and said, ''hey, stop being a douchebag'' people would probably knock it off.

The sad thing is that there's rarely 50 people prepared to do that. Hell, there's rarely even 5. The few times I've stood up against subtle bullying (overt bullying is a different thing, and doesn't seem to happen in my social circles very often), the social censure was more likely to turn on me for being a humourless PC stick in the mud who was ruining the "fun".

I find my best defence is to stop associating with douchebags. I don't tolerate crap in my house or among my friends. Now if only I could choose my family or coworkers...

[Jamaika a jamaikaiaké]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

What then, is your solution? That "fat" become a dirty word like black or nigger?

Solution to what, exactly? To your prejudice? I suppose the answer would be some kind of change on your part.

That fat people be given a pass and sympathised with for the "disease" they have that they "caught" from somewhere?

What do they need to be given a pass for? For being fat? Why is this a problem? It's possible to be fat and healthy. It's possible to be fat and happy. It's possible to be fat and live a good life. Fat people don't have to submit themselves to the judgment of "bengangmo: the universal arbiter of acceptable body sizes"

[bengangmo]

Originally Posted by Jamaika a jamaikaiaké

Solution to what, exactly? To your prejudice? I suppose the answer would be some kind of change on your part.

What do they need to be given a pass for? For being fat? Why is this a problem? It's possible to be fat and healthy. It's possible to be fat and happy. It's possible to be fat and live a good life. Fat people don't have to submit themselves to the judgment of "bengangmo: the universal arbiter of acceptable body sizes"

Jeeze, take a step back please.

I never set myself up as the arbiter of healthy body size or good body attitude.

Forgive me please for having the temerity to suggest that calling somebody fat is not hate speech. That it does't even come close.

Forgive me also for suggesting that fatness is not a disease, and that there is something that can be done other than just accept it as some sort of "condition" outside of one's control.

Yes there's a lot of evidence out there that its not easy, that someone people genuninly do have real problems losing weight, but "fat" as hate speech? Please Take some responsibility.

You will also notice that I have said, in this very thread that bullying is never acceptable? Or did you miss that in your zealous rush to condemn me as the ....uhmmm...eeerrr...what is the name for someone who is biased against unhealthy overeating and obesity anyway?

[Gruntled]

Originally Posted by Jamaika a jamaikaiaké

What do they need to be given a pass for?

For choosing to make themselves unhealthy and driving up health care costs for all of us. Then having the nerve to whine about it and claim it's "not their fault"

That pisses a lot of folks off.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Obesity is voluntary. That doesn't mean that fat people should be maliciously bullied, but calling them fat is not hate speech.

[Silvorange]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

No it doesn't, but it also doesn't mean that we need to get on the case of the person making the remark...

I don't have a problem with getting on the case of someone who is being a jerk and hiding behind "truth."

[villa]

Originally Posted by DSeid

So villa you think that is an error to call beating someone up "a crime" because it is different in degree than mass murder?

Once again, if you think that it is an overstatement to characterize "lazy assed fatty" as hate speech, that it is different in character than "Cheap Jew boy", that's fine, call it insulting speech for this discussion if you want. I obviously disagree as I believe both engage in hateful speech based on prejudicial stereotypes and to me that is the definition of hate speech.

Of course beating someone up is a crime. But if a friend of mine takes a punch outside a bar, and then later compares himself to the victims of murder, I am going to tell him to get some damned perspective on the situation.

Originally Posted by DSeid

Recognize that someone who manages to lose any significant amount of weight has achieved something admirable.

You see, this is where you acknowledge the difference, even though you choose to be blind to it in other ways. Stopping being gay, black, Jewish etc is (a) not possible and (b) not admitable. You yourself say that losing weight is admirable. If a gay person told you they had become straighter, would you say they had achieved something admirable?

I agree people should be politer. I just don't think the problems faced by fat people come close to the problems caused by homophobia, racism, and anti-semitism. I also think a lot of it is simply thinly veiled misogyny.

[Jamaika a jamaikaiaké]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

Jeeze, take a step back please.

I never set myself up as the arbiter of healthy body size or good body attitude.

Forgive me please for having the temerity to suggest that calling somebody fat is not hate speech. That it does't even come close.

Of course "fat" isn't hate speech. Did someone say it was? I thought we were talking about remarks like "lazy fatties."

Forgive me also for suggesting that fatness is not a disease, and that there is something that can be done other than just accept it as some sort of "condition" outside of one's control.

Yes there's a lot of evidence out there that its not easy, that someone people genuninly do have real problems losing weight, but "fat" as hate speech? Please Take some responsibility.

My point is that there is nothing to take responsibility for. Being fat is not a crime.

You will also notice that I have said, in this very thread that bullying is never acceptable? Or did you miss that in your zealous rush to condemn me as the ....uhmmm...eeerrr...what is the name for someone who is biased against unhealthy overeating and obesity anyway?

Originally Posted by Gruntled

For choosing to make themselves unhealthy and driving up health care costs for all of us. Then having the nerve to whine about it and claim it's "not their fault"

That pisses a lot of folks off.

Ok. Look. These two quotes are exemplars of the confusion that pisses me off. Unhealthy does not equal fat.

Unhealthy overeating and being sedentary are unhealthy behaviors. Here we agree. I am also biased against unhealthy behavior.

Where we disagree is that you can be fat and healthy. You can be fat and unhealthy. You can be slim and unhealthy. You can be slim and healthy. Most people in the US seem to confuse these two concepts.

Just because someone is fat does not mean:
-they are currently overeating
-they don't exercise
-they have heart disease
-they have diabetes
-they have high blood pressure
-they need to be shamed

While unhealthy behaviors like overeating and not exercising may cause someone to gain weight, they are still not the same thing. Fatness and unhealthiness are still two distinct concepts. Why is this so hard? I mean "correlation implies causation" is at least a logical fallacy I understand. But why, in this case, do people engage in "correlation implies equality"?

[Jackmannii]

I still feel bad about the time I was on an emergency department rotation in med school, and participated in the workup of a morbidly obese young woman who came in with what turned out to be a minor complaint. After relaying his diagnosis and recommendations, the attending ER doc looked at her and commented "You need to eat less" and walked out.

I really should have apologized in some way for his jerkitude.

Which is what is was, not "hate speech" in my book.

There is no threat of violence or denial of basic human rights to a person if you walk up to them and chant "Fat, Fat, the Water Rat!" or make cutting remarks about the obese on a message board. It's just low class.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Jamaika a jamaikaiaké

My point is that there is nothing to take responsibility for. Being fat is not a crime.

Neither are a plethora of other things people get judged on/by.

Doesnt mean the judging is totally without merit though.

And, obviously there are levels of judging that range from "kill the worthless, subhuman bastards" to 'honestly, they could do a bit better than that".

[Jamaika a jamaikaiaké]

Originally Posted by billfish678

Neither are a plethora of other things people get judged on/by.

Doesnt mean the judging is totally without merit though.

And, obviously there are levels of judging that range from "kill the worthless, subhuman bastards" to 'honestly, they could do a bit better than that".

Fine, there's also nothing at all wrong with being fat. Did you read the rest of my post? The point was that while being unhealthy is bad, being fat is not.

[Jamaika a jamaikaiaké]

I'm sorry for the multipost, but I think I realized what the logical flaw is in the prevailing opinion and why it's so temping.

Popular opinion:
-Unhealthy behavior often causes fatness
-Fatness often causes health problems.
-A implies B implies C
-Conclusion: Losing weight is the correct course of action.

A bit more reasonable point of view:
-Unhealthy behavior often causes fatness
-Unhealthy behavior often causes health problems.
-(A implies B) and (A implies C)
-Conclusion: Ignore weight, and instead focus on healthy behavior.

Of course, this means that fatness and health problems will be correlated, but only beacuse they have a common cause. But things are complicated by the fact that fat people who change their behavior don't usually lose enough weight to be "not fat". Things are also complicated by the fact that the "weight loss" crowd actually endorse lots of healthy behavior, so it's not as if they are wrong, but just misguided. Things are also complicated by the fact that our society thinks "Ew, gross fatty! Why can't you lose weight you dumb ugly slob?"

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Jamaika a jamaikaiaké

-Conclusion: Ignore weight, and instead focus on healthy behavior.

Thats great. Except for the part that (IME) most fat people are NEITHER eating healthy or exercising significantly. They just use the small fraction of fat people that ARE doing it to allow themselves to fly under the "being fat isnt inherently unheathy" radar.

[Duke]

Originally Posted by Gruntled

For choosing to make themselves unhealthy and driving up health care costs for all of us. Then having the nerve to whine about it and claim it's "not their fault"

That pisses a lot of folks off.

Talking on your cellphone while driving increases accident rates--raising insurance rates for all of us--by a factor even greater than obesity drives up health care costs. So how come you aren't obsessed by that behavior and level insults in GQ at those who do it?

Face it, you know there's more to it than just "fat people drive up costs for the rest of us." It was shown in more than one study that second-hand smoke caused health problems for others, but if one here had the temerity to suggest that perhaps under such circumstances it might be a bad idea for anyone to smoke you'd get a raft of people hollering about "right to make personal choices" and not a whole lot of those same people convinced that increased damage to others trumped that right.

Honestly, if you came right out and said "I think fat people are gross and disgusting" you'd at least be scoring some points for honesty. Tiptoeing around the real issue doesn't do you any favors.

[Rand Rover]

Meh. I think Dseid and Duke and others are misunderstanding many of the situations on this board where they see people bashing fat folks.

I've never seen someone say "I'm fat" and then just have other posters come out swinging at them. Hasn't happened, in my experience. What DOES happen is someone says "I'm fat and it's not my fault, I'm just a poor victim of circumstances I can't control, woe is me, here are some studies that prove it." And then the people you are calling fat-bashers get on the fat person's ass--but not for being fat, for being a whiny person with no sense of responsibility.

Also, re: the studies cited aboive--looking at fatness from a top-down societal perspective has nothing to do with looking at it fron a personal perspective. So, even though there are studies showing that some people are pre-disposed to weight gain and many people have trouble losing weight, that doesn't absolve you of responsibility fir your own life.

So if people get on your ass for being a whiner, don't try to paint them as the bad guy for making fun of you for being fat, because that is not what they are doing.

[Omar Little]

Originally Posted by DSeid

I'd judge "cheap Jew-boys" and "shiftless Negroes" as hate speech statements, and "lazy assed fatties" seems no different to me.

Are you this incensed when someone tells a blonde joke? In many ways blondes are more genetically predisposed to their hair color than an obese person is to their proclivity to gain weight.

But they could both do something about their condition...the fat person could eat fewer calories than they burn each day and the blonde could dye her hair.

[pinkyvee]

Originally Posted by Jackmannii

I still feel bad about the time I was on an emergency department rotation in med school, and participated in the workup of a morbidly obese young woman who came in with what turned out to be a minor complaint. After relaying his diagnosis and recommendations, the attending ER doc looked at her and commented "You need to eat less" and walked out.

I really should have apologized in some way for his jerkitude.

Which is what is was, not "hate speech" in my book.

There is no threat of violence or denial of basic human rights to a person if you walk up to them and chant "Fat, Fat, the Water Rat!" or make cutting remarks about the obese on a message board. It's just low class.

I agree.
Jerk-speech is not necessarily Hate-speech.
Hurt feelings does not put anyone in harms way.

"You need to eat less" and walking out on a patient would have gotten that physician serious consequences at my employment, where patients would often be mailed a questionnaire asking about their recent visit.

In the 80's, I worked with a crazy ass neonatologist who once looked at a baby and said to the parents:

"That is the ugliest baby I have ever seen."

Then, he left.
I remained and attempted to clean up his mess.

Jerks come in white coats too.

[AClockworkMelon]

Originally Posted by Rand Rover

I've never seen someone say "I'm fat" and then just have other posters come out swinging at them. Hasn't happened, in my experience. What DOES happen is someone says "I'm fat and it's not my fault, I'm just a poor victim of circumstances I can't control, woe is me, here are some studies that prove it." And then the people you are calling fat-bashers get on the fat person's ass--but not for being fat, for being a whiny person with no sense of responsibility.

A winrar is you.

[billfish678]

Here is what I think is interesting.

Saying unpleasant things to fat people isnt just rude or unhelpful or incorrect or misguided. It could be HATE SPEECH. And, not only THAT, all you mean old bystanders out there are guilty as well! You big bunch of meanies...all of you!

IMO thats fault deflection and excuses brought to a whole nuther level.

[Duke]

Originally Posted by Rand Rover

Meh. I think Dseid and Duke and others are misunderstanding many of the situations on this board where they see people bashing fat folks.

I've never seen someone say "I'm fat" and then just have other posters come out swinging at them. Hasn't happened, in my experience.

Even if they didn't "just" say that, how does that absolve insult-flinging in GQ? It seems there's a bit of a blind spot there. If someone wants to Pit someone over what they consider as mealy-mouthed comments, go ahead. But it seems to me there's a bit of a double standard about it. You can't (and I'd back this 100%) say "Republicans are misguided and wrong" in GQ, but it seems somehow OK to say "Fatties are delusional" there.

[Rand Rover]

Originally Posted by Duke

Even if they didn't "just" say that, how does that absolve insult-flinging in GQ? It seems there's a bit of a blind spot there. If someone wants to Pit someone over what they consider as mealy-mouthed comments, go ahead. But it seems to me there's a bit of a double standard about it. You can't (and I'd back this 100%) say "Republicans are misguided and wrong" in GQ, but it seems somehow OK to say "Fatties are delusional" there.

Well, like I said, I've seen no evidence of "Fatties are delusional." I have seen lots of "Whiners are whiny" and "Delusional people are delusional."

And I agree that GQ is not an appropriate place for any of these remarks, but it sounds like people in this thread are upset about much more than just posts in GQ.

[Duke]

Originally Posted by Rand Rover

Well, like I said, I've seen no evidence of "Fatties are delusional." I have seen lots of "Whiners are whiny" and "Delusional people are delusional."

In the locked GQ thread Gruntled supplied this gem in response to one of my posts:

Fatties, OTOH, know perfectly well that they are eating too much, but either lie about it or are in denial.

So, OK, actually "Fatties are either liars or in denial." Pretty close to what I said though.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Duke

. You can't (and I'd back this 100%) say "Republicans are misguided and wrong" in GQ, but it seems somehow OK to say "Fatties are delusional" there.

Depends on what you mean by "delusional".

Fat people, statistically speaking, often claim the following which on average IMO is NOT true.

I am not fat (the doctors and society and the charts disagree).
I am not fat because I am not fatter than many people around me (who are fat).
Being fat is not unhealthy (yeah the doctors only want you thin so you look good).
I don't eat much (though the only people that eat more than you are fatter than you).
I only eat healthy food (you know, the good stuff, like PF Changs).
I only eat XYZ calories per day (but, when checked carefully it is actually XYZ plus a good bit more).
I exercise like crazy (once around the block per day).
I CAN NOT loose weight (though people just like you HAVE)

Is EVERY fat person guilty of ALL these "delusions"? Of course not. Are a darn good fraction of em at least guilty of one, if not many of em? Yes IMO and IME.

Maybe "delusional" ain't the best word, but OTOH I don't think its totally misleading BS wordsmithing and name calling either.

[Rand Rover]

Duke, like I just said, I don't think that's OK in GQ, but the OP of this thread and other coments were not confined to GQ.

[Duke]

Originally Posted by billfish678

Is EVERY fat person guilty of ALL these "delusions"? Of course not. Are a darn good fraction of em at least guilty of one, if not many of em? Yes IMO and IME.

Again, there seems to be a double standard. I could argue, for example, that most Republicans are guilty of a whole raft of misguided ideas. That doesn't make it OK for me to claim that they're all "misguided" in GQ, for example (and throw in an insulting term for them while I'm doing that, to boot). It seems as though you're arguing that that's OK as long as we're talking about "fat people."

[Duke]

Originally Posted by Rand Rover

Duke, like I just said, I don't think that's OK in GQ, but the OP of this thread and other coments were not confined to GQ.

No, but I think it's an example of what he's getting at. Nobody would have thought twice about slamming a comment like that down if it were targeted at a political group, which is most definitely a group people belong to by choice. But when the same kind of comment is made against "fatties" the people who use it claim it's acceptable because...well, being fat is a choice, they argue.