It’s not, and no one has said it is. Some people, however, can’t seem to wrap their heads around the fact that obesity is a complex medical condition which does not respond positively to shame, disgust, or punishment.
There is so much abject fail in this statement, I’m going to have to break it out into a list:
[ul]
[li] you’re right: you have no idea what triggers these levels of obesity. It’s a shame you don’t let that stop you from talking.[/li][li] not every fat person has congestive heart failure. Not every person with congestive heart failure has obesity. Obesity is the cause of heart failure in less than 10% of diagnoses. [/li][li] people who get to the point of needing a crane to lift them are in need of drastic medical intervention, not “cutting out” some food. They are not going out and getting that much food. It’s being brought to them by someone who is deeply enmeshed in a codependent relationship with them.[/li][li] The fact that you think a girl’s daily caloric intake is greater than your monthly caloric just shows how deficient your understanding is. Figuring she stood around five feet tall, she would have needed around 3200 calories per day to maintain her weight. A man standing six feet tall weighing 190 lbs would need not quite 2300 to maintain weight, or just under 69,000 calories.[/li][li] How the mother paid for it is not that hard to figure out. She bought cheap food made of highly processed ingredients high in sugar and fat. 3200 calories of cheap peanut butter costs about $2.55.[/li][/ul]
Bullshit.
You said:
You called the woman in that portrait a thing - “can that thing even stand”. You claimed you’d never called a nude obscene. A nude is an undressed model, the subject of the portrait. You were referring directly to the woman in question and not her appearance. Either live up to what you said or apologize for your words, but give up on your spineless backpedaling.
(NOTE: Don’t click either link if you hate South Park or can’t handle a little over-the-top humor about this issue. Do click both links if Cartman tends to crack you up!)
Which would be an excellent point, if I’d claimed that. I didn’t say “less than 10% of obese people have heart failure.” I said “less than 10% of cases of heart failure are caused by obesity.” The most common causes of heart failure, according to the Mayo Clinic are cardiac infarction, atherosclerosis, and hypertension. Obesity is certainly a contributing factor to these conditions, but it isn’t a direct cause of heart failure, and any 13 year old girl who is both 350 pounds and has congestive heart failure has a hell of a lot more going on than an out-of-control sweet tooth.
Aside from being an exercise in futility, no one is claiming this other than the artist in question. What I, and others, are arguing for is that people mute their knee jerk reactions of disgust and horror and remember that these are human beings with complex medical issues who deserve our compassion.
To people familiar with photography, “nude” means the image.
Too bad you didn’t know that.
I also made the point of holding the suppliers to account for the condition. Nice you agree.
If they don’t even try to reduce their intake, what do you suppose their chances are of seeking a medical intervention?
I’m not an MD, but I believe that “Heart Failure” <> “Congestive Heart Failure”.
It is my understanding that the reason the massively obese are so rare is because most people will die of congestive heart failure around 350-400 pounds. Note what congestive heart failure is - the heart is unable to push enough blood through the organism to sustain life. More pipe than pump and/or water, for the irrigation model.
As to calling her a thing: she has self-selected to present herself and her 400+ pounds of fat to the world as an example of a perfectly wonderful way for a human to be. It may be a tip-off if people don’t see a person when presented with her undressed body.
My Q stands: can it stand? She choose to be photographed in a manner which maximizes her fat. In very view other poses would a lump of fat on a lump of fat on a lump of fat take up more canvas than her face..
I think the issue still remains in that is it necessary to call an honest-to-Og human being a “thing” or an “it”? No matter how distasteful you may find her appearance or anything else about her that you can gleam from one photograph, she’s still a person just like any of the rest of us.
