Of COURSE we do, yosemite!! I mean, anyone who OBVIOUSLY doesn’t have the willpower to eat less, and has the AUDACITY to love themselves anyway, is a TERRIBLE person.
:rolleyes:
(For those who don’t know me, this was SARCASTIC!)
I think this country needs some group to pick on, a clearly recognizable scapegoat to heap deep-seated feelings of both inferiority and misplaced superiority. Being Americans and, of course a moraliy just nation, the scapegoats have to deserve the scorn.
This tendancy to find a group of people to feel superior to is so ingrained and so instinctual that people don’t even notice when they do it. Sure the moo-ers and the oinkers know that they are being cruel, but they are backed up by the “it’s-there-own-fault”-ers. It’s bad to be fat. If you are fat, then you are a *bad person and your character can be faulted just because you are fat. Since you are bad and are at fault then it’s O.K. to pick on you.
Wow, I’m still thinking Wow! I’m honestly moved and saddened by the anguish expressed in this thread.
As many of the posters have begun their replies to this thread I probably shouldn’t enter the fray here but…
I can’t stay silent. Witnessing the outpourings of grief and angst from so many of the spirits whose company I have come to silently cherish over the past months is quite a bit more than I can bear. I hope that I have something to add, something value neutral, something that is neither divisive nor mean-spirited, buy not wishy-washy with We are the World either. And hopefully, if the way I truly feel concerning the issues raised by this thread come across in my reply, I won’t ultimately regret having posted.
To begin, my credentials: Officially, I am working towards an MD and a PhD in immunology (Almost there… must…keep…pipetting.) but unofficially, I make an avid hobby of the study of the intersection of sociology and biology.
Our biology is commonly given short shrift in discussions of a sociological nature. Even worse, when biology is called into play, often it is abused in the form of an argument from authority, to justify meaningless, bigoted views. Hopefully, the consensus will not view this post as an example of the latter.
Consider, please, from where does our concept of an attractive mate arise? Why does this notion bang around our brains in the first place? I would argue that the latter stems from our heritage of billions of year of natural selection while the former is the conjoined set of our biological heritage and the influence of our personal experience.
The study of the spectrum of life on our planet teaches us that the adoption of a mating strategy is a nearly universal result of the sexual mode of reproduction. And genetic fitness is commonly accepted as the yardstick by which mate desirability is measured. Scientists define genetic fitness in terms of the ability to produce offspring who, in turn, survive to produce offspring of their own. This process, acting iteratively, selectively preserves and amplifies the genetic material of a fit individual over time, whereas traits which ameliorate the fitness of an individual are selectively lost. The competitive nature of sexual reproduction dictates that there be haves and have nots.
The crux of the biscuit (my favorite Zappa line) is how do we figure out who’s who and do the reasons always need to make sense? Consider the lilles of the field…no, I don’t know enough about the lillies, consider instead two species of bird. The first species (I think they are called weaver birds, but I may be wrong) determines mate desirability based on the nest-buliding skills of the male birds. These guys devote themselves to constructing these amazing, elaborate, tree-bound Taj Majals. And then Princess Girlie Bird comes flitting around on an inspection tour, choosing a mate that built a comfy castle. The second species (I don’t know the name) measures male desirabilty on the basis of how ornate the male’s tail plumage is. You should see these guys; they are pretty small, they fly, but they have these foot long tails. Very pretty and all, but it’s hard to imagine how it helps the bird survive and reproduce. You could even make a case that the tail plumage makes this little guy more suceptible to predation. In direct contrast is the nest building behavior of species #1 where one can say with reasonable certainty that the ability to construct a decent nest should increase an individual’s reproductive fitness. Now just because it’s hard to explain how #2’s tail plumage helps it to survive and reproduce doesn’t mean that a good reason doesn’t exist. Scientists try hard to ascribe a fitness inducing rationale to the big tail; perhaps some unknown genetic linkage exists between those loci responsible for large, ornate plumage and a gene that confers fitness more directly, or maybe the tail directly influences fitness but for a reason as of yet obscure to us. There’s another possibility, however. Traits can be selection neutral. In other words, perhaps the tail neither improves or diminishes the bird’s chance to survive to reproductive age and produce fertile offspring. Perhaps the designation of ornate tail plumage as a measure of sexual desirability is a an arbitrary ramification of a system of sexual reproduction which demands there be competition based on some traits. In summary, differential desirability is something we’re stuck with as a result of our method of reproduction and in some cases it’s clear why a trait would be considered attractive while in others the situation os considerably more ambiguous.
That brings me to humans. How do we humans figure out what is attractive? We have all read the reports concerning facial symmetry and how individuals with a high degree of bilateral facial symmetry are regarded as more attractive. How and why would facial symmetry influence reproductive fitness in such a way that we adopt this as a measure of mate desirability? Well, the researchers who conduct this work, in an elaborate display of hand waving, argue that somehow the genetically encoded ability to generate a symmetrical face, confers additional, as of yet unknown advantages. Maybe, but I have an alternate explanation. We are endlessly bombarded with examples of who our ideal mates should be, through the mass media. All of the actors, actresses, and models that continuously splash across our screens, big and small, on billboards, in magazines, on the internet, these are our ideal mates. And we get to see them get laid all the time. I know they don’t usually show anything, but that primitive center of our brains that controls mating behavior, believes that they’re getting some. And it fools into believing that they’re with us. In a way, our movie stars are our virtual mates. We are almost intimate with them as they beam into our living rooms and onto our movie screens.
You think that are intellectualizing away these influences on your own preferences? That it doesn’t make sense to kill yourself to look like Kate Moss so that you’ll be more desirable to your Hollywood film studio full of virtual mates? I think this occurs on an individual basis, perhaps, but as a society we are certainly under their spell. And even those of us that rally intellectually against the tide-like pull of our desire centers, are aware that this is done with considerable effort. In the martial arts, we are taught to control the body with the mind. The degree of control attainable, however, is objectively, quite small. I greatly admired my martial arts mentor, but would be quite surprized if he could succeed in willing his body to survive without oxygen.
Ultimately we are all held captive by the amazing power of our biological imperatives. Most attempts of the intellect to conspire against our biology are fruitless. We fuck, breathe, and eat. Once the criteria for who we want to fuck or how much and what we should eat are established, the influence of the mind over these decisions is variable and generally suboptimal.
In the USA food is plentiful. And not just low calorie health foods neither. I doubt that historically, as our ancestors crawled out of the oceans, that this was the case. No individual that dies of starvation at a young age contributes it’s genetic heritage to the next generation. The drive to eat carries billions of years of baggage in it’s genetic formulation. Sopping up precious calories is arguably an indispensible survival-promoting behavior under the conditions of our development.
However, choosing a suboptimal mate just as surely condemns you to genetic obscurity as would early death due to starvation. You’ve heard, “Don’t fight City Hall.” Well biology is a power hungry demon that even the likes of Mr Guiliani doesn’t stand a chance against.
Our bodies eat because that’s the formulation that works. We choose our mates based on characteristics expressed by our innumerable virtual mates. I would no sooner expect someone to lose 100lbs than I would expect someone to be attracted to a mate they deem to lack the appropriate desirability traits. To those who discount the role of biology in the choices we make, who elevate the intellect and reasoned decision-making to the role of the ultimate arbiter, I must respectfully disagree with your position.
In closing, I wish to discuss the Sneetches. The birds on the beaches, half with, half without, stars upon thars. I feel that the conclusion of the book is utterly fairy-tale city, and I’d liks to propose an alternative. To sumarize the plot, there were two kinds of sneetches; those that had a little star on their bellies and those who did not. The star-bellied guys had all the social advantages and ostracised the non-starred birds. The non-starred guys, rather than rallying their resources and numbers, believed that their starless status actually DID make them inferior. Things heated up when the shrewd Sylvester McMonkey McBean arrived on the scene. For a coupla’ bucks each, he put a star on the belly of each starless Sneetch. They flocked in droves and soon all the Sneetches had stars. This really pissed off the ones who had stars at the start and so, for a small fee, McBean removed all of their stars, thus allowing them to regain their superior status. Well, as you all know, what followed next was pandemonium. The newly starred guys wanted their stars off, followed by the originally starred guys getting their stars put back, and so on, and so on. Until nobody knew who was who and they had lost all their money, sending McBean and his machine packing. Upon seeing the futility of the situation (there was no way to establish who the original elites were or who the original downtrodden were) the Sneetches decided to live together in harmony.
Unfortunately, our differences usually don’t vanish. And they are maintained by powerful forces that we have less than adequate control over. I wish McBean had never visited Sneetch Island. I wish the non-starred Sneetches had the insight to support one another. Elevate themselves without the approval of their sneering so called superiors. And that both groups could realize that since being the same is impossible, there’s no reason to hate one another for their differences.
One of the unique features of this board is that one can’t see the stars or lack of upon our fellow Sneetches. I try hard in life to rebell against what I consider to be my more primitave drives. But in life, you get to look for stars, and I’m sure this has immeasurable influence on us all. We exist here as pure intellects. And I respect and admire you all, my fellow sneetches.
Devotedly,
CB
Can’t comment on the sneetches, choosybeggar, 'cause you lost me there, but I will say this: One of the leading causes of obesity in women is a condition called polycystic ovarian syndrome. PCOS, in turn, is a very common cause of infertility. Therefore, it makes “genetic sense” to avoid obese women, as they are more likely than thinner (but not too thin!) women to be infertile.
webmstr, you, sir, are an idiot past all redemption.
yosemite, I think that webmasturbater thinks, when one reads his posts, that fat people deserve his holier-than thou scorn and derision, as well as those from other people in society. I don’t care to change his smoking brain, heroin-chic mindset.
I’m glad you decided to post, choosybeggar. Damned fine job: thoughtful, informed and humane. Keep 'em coming!
Veb
You’re right about PCOS, obesity and infertility but that’s not exactly what I meant in terms of mate selection. I guess an important concept that gets lost in this is that individuals of a species don’t directly evaluate genetic fitness. They can observe behaviors and physical traits, that’s all. Now if in a species, obesity were generally associated with infertility, maybe you could make a case for selection of a mating strategy that devalues obese individuals. I don’t believe this is the case with PCOS and obesity, though. While it’s true that women with PCOS tend towards obesity, it is not true that obese women tens toward PCOS.
I argued that today’s obseity is a result of the union of genetic and sociological factors. Genetically speaking, we’re preprogrammed eating machines, built to survive times of scarcity. Sociologically, however, we’re living in a time of great abundance. The relative dominance of our drive to nourish ourselves(our animal instincts, if you will) which is well-adapted to function lean times, leads to obesity in the times of modern abundance. I don’t think that plumpness is a negative for mate selection at all times, or in all cultures, or even in all individuals living in the modern USA. More simply, I believe that we possess a collective sense of the ideal mate, and that the drive to find mates who conform somewhat to this ideal is a powerful one. Perhaps as powerful as the drive to nourish oneself. That’s why I stated that I would no sooner expect someone living in the modern USA to be able to lose a great deal of weight than I would expect another to be able to significantly modify their mating preferences.
You raise very valid points here yosemitebabe. The criticism I said I reserve the right to have, is not the “oinking” and “mooing” that you speak of. No one deserves that sort of treatment regardless of why they are obese.
The criticism I have for them is when they complain to the camera that they are mistreated by society when it is out of their control. They complain that they can’t get jobs because of how they look, but they can’t help their weight. Obese people, I am afraid to say, don’t look good for a professional image. Am I saying that is right? No. I am saying it happens. Just like rape. Is it right? Of course not. But it happens.
It has been said by many people here that “If only ‘slim’ people could view the world through the eyes of someone who is obese”. My response to that is “If only obese people could view the world through the eyes of someone who is not.”
Overweight people, who can’t help their weight, you have my undying sympathy. Those who claim they aren’t in control of their weight, when they are, and they are obese, I criticise you. Not in name calling, but in that you choose to hide the fact you over eat, claim it is out of your control, and then blame society for how they treat you.
Well, I did in fact cover what appears to be your, mmm, inadequacies in the logic department. It follows that when you are presented with logic or gaps in your own, you would fail to see it.
uh, yes. You said it, I just quoted it. (And proceeded to explain to you how ridiculous it was) And you said it two different ways in two different posts, so it’s not strange to think you meant it.
It’s almost cute the way you keep coming up with new “ideas” to explain what you * really * meant. In the above case, you said nothing even resembling what you are claiming here. You said what I quoted you as saying. Go back and look for yourself - as we all can. Claiming you didn’t say what is here to be read by everyone is kinda silly, doncha think? Do you think because it’s 5 pages long no one can find what you actually said?
You’d think, wouldn’t you. Turns out it’s not true. One more of the many complexities of obesity. And one more example of your ignorance on the subject.
Throughout this whole thread, you have done nothing except say what you *think ought *to be true, and presenting it as what ** is ** true . The arrogance is breathtaking. There are doctors who specialize in obesity research and treatment…did they learn at your oh-so-wise knee? You appear to be suffering from the perfectly bizarre notion that because you are offended and disgusted by other people’s obesity, and do not have a problem with it yourself, that you are some kind of expert on the subject. When and how did lack of experience, training, or education begin to qualify as expertise? Are you equally expert on drug and alcohol addiction and treatment? Wait…let me guess the Webmastr assessment: “Alcoholism is drinking too much…just stop it! No more problem!” And how about the other end of the eating disorders spectrum, eh? “Anorexia? What the fuck? EAT, you stupid stick figures!” (although something tells me that you are probably more sympathetic to those who perversely starve themselves than those who perversely stuff themselves…after all, they’re so much cuter) “Depression? Cheer up! Panic disorders? Calm down! OCD? Just stop being so fucking weird!” And of course: “Bulimia? Well, that’s one effective way of avoiding the most accursed condition on the planet, so there’s nothing wrong with that.”
You just want to rant about the disgusting fat people, and again…educating yourself or even admitting your ignorance would rob you of what you cling to as your justification for doing so: fat people are all pigs that are just too lazy to change. Fuck 'em.
Oh, right…all the hoards of fat people who run you down on the street and make you listen to their tales of woe. Poor you… again, this is bizarre state of affairs and I think you should look into why they all pick you to complain to - after all, as you’ve explained, that’s really the only thing you have a problem with. All the *** complaining ** * fat people.
Why indeed? And you know, fat people NEVER try to lose weight. NEVER. Not ever. Every single fat person you have ever laid eyes on never made the slightest effort to lose the weight. Not for ten seconds. And they never will. And all of them, the minute they lay eyes on you, will sit on you and lie to you and tell you how much they hate it and nothing they “try” ever works. JUST to annoy you.
,
“Call them out” for being fat? Why, that’s not YOU, Webmastr, because you never did anything of the sort! You were just a little fed up at all the hoards of fat people who hassle you by complaining about how fat they are, that’s all.
Dude… rather than focusing all this energy on the perceived inadequacies of people you do not even know, may I suggest that you devote a little energy to getting to know yourself. At least well enough to be able to keep your story straight when you take it upon yourself to let everyone else know what’s wrong with them.
And never forget that for many people, the most important and meaningful things in life have nothing whatsoever to do with appearance. And our lives are so much richer for it. Perhaps someday you will get a tiny hint of what lies below the surface and seek a deeper life for yourself… then again…nah.
stoid
PS:
Because society does not primarily value appearance in males. Duh!
Am I to understand that the documentarians measured their subjects’ weight fluctuation over just ONE week and drew conclusions? That’s not enough time to get decent results. And just 13 people as a sample?
Leaving aside the many phisiological and genetic factors that come into play, and the fact that you have come to this conclusion based on watching 13 people in one TV program (hardly a reliable scientific study, much less a representative sample of anything), I will ask you about the same thing I borugh up to webmastr: do you dismiss alcoholics by saying they are simply choosing to drink, with no other factors at work? Drug addicts? Anorexics? Bulimics? Obsessive-compulsives? The depressed? The suicidal?
My point is not that all fat people are clinically ill compulsives (although many are), only that millions and millions of people have problems that include behaviors which, when observed in the most superficial way, appear to be completely within the control of the persons who are behaving in whatever way. But we all know it is nowhere near that simple. You who do not have issues with food have no idea why extremely fat people could allow themselves to become so fat because YOU would never let it happen. Of course not…but it has nothing to do with you being somehow superior, stronger, better, tougher, more focused, more able, more in control. You don’t have the desire to overeat to begin with. You certainly don’t have the compulsion to overeat.
Do you consider yourself stronger, better, superior to, tougher than, especially admirable because you are NOT an alcoholic? NOT an anorexic? NOT a drug addict? If you do, you shouldn’t. Why would you? Is it a matter of great restraint on your part to keep yourself from shooting up heroin every day? No…you don’t WANT TO. So there is nothing to be admired or respected in your not doing so. Your lack of drug addiction is not because you did battle with the demon and slew him… you’ve never met him face to face. So if someone else who HAS met the demon face to face gets their ass kicked most of the time, who the hell are you to criticize them?
And food is a special case. Unlike all other addictions, it is the only substance which is not only considered to be one of life’s greatest pleasures by nearly all people, it is also absolutely mandatory for life to continue. Imagine telling an alcoholic he can have one beer a day.
So you are free to be disgusted by the site of a fat body - it is considered unattractive. But you cannot justly sit in judgment of fat people. You have NO IDEA the factors they deal with that brought them to this pass.
By the way, what I was talking about here refers only to those fat people who have absolutely NO other factors except compulsive overeating. The fact is that most fat people have more than that alone constributing to their condition. Genes, the effect of yo-yo diets, hormonal factors, etc.
And finally, why do you suppose fat people feel the need to deny responsibility for being fat? (Aside from the universal desire to deny responsibility for anything unpleasant, a desire I don’t understand since it is only through responsibility that we can effect change, but that is a different topic) Among other things, I would say that it has not a little to do with the fact that people seem to feel it is acceptable to despise, criticize, ostracize, reject and otherwise torment fat people if they can be “blamed” for their fatness. A proposition you were supposedly separating yourself from when you said this:
Emphasis yours. When is it no longer ok for society to treat fat people badly? And why do you, webmastr, or anyone else thinks it is necessary, useful, or in any way productive to criticize fat people at all? Do you have the tiniest clue what it is * like * to be fat? Because if you do, then you know that your criticism, which you reserve for those who apparantly are in perfect control yet choose to surrender it, then amounts to criticizing someone for torturing themselves. How very compassionate and understanding of you.
stoid
Stoid, you have been just wonderful on this thread. Every word is brilliant. Thanks so much for contributing.
I don’t think you understood me. Whether or not it is in their control is not the issue. Sure, I understand that it is irritating to hear a fat person (who obviously eats too much) complain about how helpless they are. I have a friend like that. I don’t like to hear her complain. But, that isn’t the issue that I am addressing right now. Whether or not a fat person in complete denial about why they are fat is not the point. They are STILL entitled to bitch about how crappy society treats them. Because, in control or not, eating like a pig or not, their fatness is NO ONE ELSE’S BUSINESS. Is a bald man entitled to be irritated and angry about how society (some of society, anyway) treats him? He could wear a toupee, he could try Rogaine. And if he doesn’t, why should he complain? He could do something to “fix” the “problem”. Right? So why be irritated and frustrated with society for their superficial and often cruel attitude? Right?
Sez who? You mean Camrin Manheim (sp) from “The Practice” (the big girl with the long hair) does not have a “professional image”? She doesn’t come off as a competent and intelligent lawyer on that show? I guess they had no business hiring her for that show. Fat people can’t possibly “look good for a professional image.” :rolleyes:
Actually, it is morally wrong, and pretty unethical. To not hire an otherwise qualified person because they are fat? If they are dressed well, in tasteful, classy clothes, groomed well, clean, well-spoken - but still FAT - I don’t think that this should make them ineligble for a job. Any more than not hiring an older person, because they’re old, or whatever. It isn’t right. And anyone, fat, old, one-legged, Martian, who can’t get a job for this reaason is entitled to bitch about it. Why shouldn’t they?
So a scantily-clad woman (she didn’t have to wear that mini-skirt) gets raped. Is it fair? Is it right? No. But hey - she’d better not bitch too much, because she could have dressed differently. And she didn’t. Just like a fat person could lose weight, and they didnn’t. So - they should just stop the griping, right?
What exactly is your point? I am not black, I am not Pakistani, I am not Martian. I am not (that) old. I have all my limbs. But I still know better than to treat black, Pakistani, Martian, old and one-legged people like crap.
Why the hell shouldn’t they blame society? IT IS NOT SOCIETY’S PLACE TO JUDGE THEM, OR TREAT THEM LIKE CRAP. THEIR OBESITY IS NO ONE ELSE’S BUSINESS. Can I make it any clearer? It is NOT your business. You may be tired of hearing how “they can’t help” being fat, but that still doesn’t mean that they are not entitled to be angry at society for treating them like crap, in a hundred different subtle (and not-so-subtle) ways.
Let’s say that your live in a world where model train enthusiasm is frowned upon. And model train geeks get discrimiated against. And you just LOVE model trains. Do you think it is anyone else’s business that you like this thing? Is it hurting them? Is it impacting on their life? And even though soceity frowns upon model train collecting, do you have to lie back and take their crap? Can’t you complain? Not because you are unable to stop liking model trains, but because IT IS NO ONE ELSE’S PLACE TO CARE about such a thing. It is none of their business.
“Leaving aside the many phisiological and genetic factors that come into play, and the fact that you have come to this conclusion based on watching 13 people in one TV program (hardly a reliable scientific study, much less a representative sample of anything),”.
- My criticism is for those who are in complete control of their weight, and bitch how they are mistreated to society when it is out of their control. The documentary showed me that IT HAPPENS. I know doco’s can sometime’s give false information, but clearly you are not going to tell me that EVERY fat person who claims that no matter how much they eat they are still staying fat, are genuine. Those who are NOT genuine is where my criticism lies.
“I will ask you about the same thing I borught up to webmastr: do you dismiss alcoholics by saying they are simply choosing to drink, with no other factors at work? Drug addicts? Anorexics? Bulimics? Obsessive-compulsives? The depressed? The suicidal?”.
- Fair question, but I view this as being a bit different. If someone is an alcoholic, and they are TRYING to get off it, then good on them. Drug addicts? Different again. If they are TRYING to get off the drugs, good for them. They shouldn’t have started taking them in the first place though. Anorexics? Bulimics? Obsessive compulsives? I have no views on this as I don’t know enough about the conditions. The depressed? If they are clinically depressed, they have my sympathy. If they’ve been having a bad run of things and they are depressed, my sympathy. I am talking about people who complain about how society mistreats them when they are in total control of their weight. When you start bringing up people with other conditions, you can’t use the same philosophy.
“Of course not…but it has nothing to do with you being somehow superior, stronger, better, tougher, more focused, more able, more in control. ?”
- This is debatable. Better? Well if I am laborer having to pick up, lift and carry things all day, or a job requiring me to be always on the move, then I am sorry, but yes - I would be better at it then someone who is obese.
More focused? Well, again, someone who is distracted with a constant need (or want) to eat, is going to be less focused on a job then someone who doesn’t have those distractions.
More in control? In my opinion, ABSOLUTELY. Obese people obviously can not control themselves (or at least don’t TRY to) control themselves when it comes to wanting to eat. So, in my opinion, absolutely.
Superior? Stronger? Tougher? - not in any major way, no.
“Your lack of drug addiction is not because you did battle with the demon and slew him… you’ve never met him face to face.”
That’s because I was not stupid enough to take him on in the first place. But we are veering off track here.
“They are STILL entitled to bitch about how crappy society treats them. Because, in control or not, eating like a pig or not, their fatness is NO ONE ELSE’S BUSINESS.”
- In that case, I am also entitled to bitch about them as well. Which is exactly what I was trying to do in my OP.
“Is a bald man entitled to be irritated and angry about how society (some of society, anyway) treats him? He could wear a toupee, he could try Rogaine. And if he doesn’t, why should he complain? He could do something to “fix” the “problem”. Right? So why be irritated and frustrated with society for their superficial and often cruel attitude? Right”
- Men who are bald have zero, that’s ZERO control over going bald. Fat people do not have their obesity thrust upon them regardless of what they do. Some of them are responsible for it. SOME of them.
"(my quote about how fat people do not look as good for a professional image)
Sez who? You mean Camrin Manheim (sp) from “The Practice” (the big girl with the long hair) does not have a “professional image”? She doesn’t come off as a competent and intelligent lawyer on that show? I guess they had no business hiring her for that show. Fat people can’t possibly “look good for a professional image.”
- It’s very easy for someone to have credibility as a lawyer on a television show when the SCRIPT SAYS that they are going to be admired by their peers, and when they are PORTRAYED as having credibility. Please stick to realistic arguements and not refer to how a Hollywood actress is scripted to be portrayed on something which is not even real.
“To not hire an otherwise qualified person because they are fat? If they are dressed well, in tasteful, classy clothes, groomed well, clean, well-spoken - but still FAT - I don’t think that this should make them ineligble for a job. Any more than not hiring an older person, because they’re old, or whatever. It isn’t right”
- I couldn’t agree more. But it happens.
“And anyone, fat, old, one-legged, Martian, who can’t get a job for this reaason is entitled to bitch about it”
- People can’t help being old, one-legged or a Martian. Obese? Different story.
“So a scantily-clad woman (she didn’t have to wear that mini-skirt) gets raped. Is it fair? Is it right? No. But hey - she’d better not bitch too much, because she could have dressed differently. And she didn’t”
- Different story, women can’t help being raped, my complaint was aimed at those who are in control of their weight, why do I have to keep repeating this…
“What exactly is your point? I am not black, I am not Pakistani, I am not Martian. I am not (that) old. I have all my limbs. But I still know better than to treat black, Pakistani, Martian, old and one-legged people like crap”
- Again, people can’t help being black, Pakistani, Martian… yadda… my arguement was aimed at those who ARE in control… yadda yadda…
“IT IS NOT SOCIETY’S PLACE TO JUDGE THEM, OR TREAT THEM LIKE CRAP. THEIR OBESITY IS NO ONE ELSE’S BUSINESS. Can I make it any clearer? It is NOT your business”.
- Ok, that is just plain wrong. These obese people are MAKING it other people’s business by BITCHING about it to THEM. They COMPLAIN TO THEM. TO THEIR FACE. It is now our business when they begin to BITCH about it. If you are obese, because you deliberately over-eat, but you don’t bitch about it, then I don’t have a single problem with you. If you are obese under similar circumstances, and choose to bitch about it, then I am sorry, but you have just made it my business.
“You may be tired of hearing how “they can’t help” being fat, but that still doesn’t mean that they are not entitled to be angry at society for treating them like crap, in a hundred different subtle (and not-so-subtle) ways”.
- Yep. And I am entitled to bitch back.
“Let’s say that your live in a world where model train enthusiasm is frowned upon. And model train geeks get discrimiated against. And you just LOVE model trains. Do you think it is anyone else’s business that you like this thing? Is it hurting them? Is it impacting on their life? And even though soceity frowns upon model train collecting, do you have to lie back and take their crap? Can’t you complain? Not because you are unable to stop liking model trains, but because IT IS NO ONE ELSE’S PLACE TO CARE about such a thing. It is none of their business”.
- If these model train collectors appeared on my TV screen and began BITCHING to me about it, then yes. It is my business. If they choose not to bitch about it, and accept that train modelling is frowned upon, good on them. However, if they begin to bitch about it, then YES. They have just MADE it my BUSINESS.
::takes a breather::
This a a good excerpt to highlight the notion of how our mating preferences are obtained. Doc Moss (surprisingly) make a good point regarding this character’s portrayal. When he says her credibility (in his view)is a result of the way she’s treated by her peers, it underscores the idea that our mating preferences are informed by character portrayal in the mass media. And Doc, I’m not saying you are ready to jump her bones, but instead I am highlighting your assertion that you feel radically different about this fat lady simply because she is highly regarded by her peers.
Doc, you choose to view this situation as an artificial one. It cuts against the grain of the normally low status of fat women in contemporary mass entertainment. But you make an assumption that you probably don’t even realize that you’re making, and it’s one that renders the logic of your argument hopelessly flawed. This assumption is that the current majority view of what constitutes an attractive mate is somehow intrinsic to our nature. I would like to hear how you’ve come to that conclusion.
I argue instead that the existence of mating preferences is intrinsic to our nature, but that how these preferences are determined is greatly influenced by exposure to environmental cues. Evolutionary biologists describe a fit individual as one who has a high likelihood of passing his or her genes onto the next generation. Individuals of a species, however, possess no **direct means ** of evaluating fitness in this manner. We can’t see genes. We don’t subject potential mates to a rigorous statistical analysis, evaluation the reproductive and survival potentials of their first degree relatives and extended families for 20 generations. Instead, pulled by the irresistable tide of our need to have some set of criteria that describe the ideal mate, we look to our surroundings to see who is getting nookie and what are their observable traits. Well, Doc, I know you probably think that your preferences are the way they are because you’re right, because you side with the majority, because a slender figure really is more attractive than a bulkier one, but I have some bad news for you. You have arrived at your conclusions by passive acceptance of the virtual mates you observe everywhere around you. Those characters on TV that are slender and attractive, you find them attractive because you are observing members of your species with a narrowly defined set of traits that are ceaselessly participating in mating behavior. You don’t even realize this.
In another setting, and indeed historically this has been the case, human animals choose completely differ criteria for what constitutes attractive mates. The irony is that the fatness trait expressed in modern US society is with us because during past generations, reaching far back across geological periods, holding onto your calories well constituted a good thing. It afforded a survival advantage and probably a little meat on the bones was perceived as a positive trait for a potential mate to possess.
Even today,there are situations where the obese are possibly at an advantage survival-wise over the slender. It’s a common and oft repeated belief among MD’s that when fat people get sick, they get thin, when thin people get sick, they die. Now I know of no controlled study that validates this belief, but I can tell you that many physicians take some stock in it.
The consensus view of what constitutes an attractive mate
-
-
- The US does have a lot of fat people. Louisiana especially. Pork-o-rama. - MC
-
This is idiotic. You say that it should not matter, but then go on to babble about how obese people should basically suck it up and live with nearly universal societal scorn because “they could do something about it”.
Fuck you. Nobody should be held in scorn for anything they do or are that doesn’t harm other people. It does not matter if you can change the characteristic that narrow-minded bigots find offensive or not; the fact remains that they are narrow-minded bigots and are wrong. End of story.
Wait, fat people don’t have a professional image? Well, HELL! Let’s see…(looks around her office), I’m fat, and I’m professional. Half our information processing division is overweight. looks over at sales staff Yep, about half again. Our CIO is, and an overweight WOMAN! The horror!
And just FTR - this was the same in my LAST company, and is the same in three other consulting firms here in Washington DC. So nope, THAT theory don’t hold up, Doc.
“Doc, you choose to view this situation as an artificial one. It cuts against the grain of the normally low status of fat women in contemporary mass entertainment. But you make an assumption that you probably don’t even realize that you’re making, and it’s one that renders the logic of your argument hopelessly flawed. This assumption is that the current majority view of what constitutes an attractive mate is somehow intrinsic to our nature. I would like to hear how you’ve come to that conclusion.”
I’d like you to show me where I drew that conclusion.
"Even today,there are situations where the obese are possibly at an advantage survival-wise over the slender. It’s a common and oft repeated belief among MD’s that when fat people get sick, they get thin, when thin people get sick, they die. Now I know of no controlled study that validates this belief, but I can tell you that many physicians take some stock in it.’
Obese people also die of heart failure at an alarming rate. I KNOW MD’s take stock of that.
As for the rest of your email, well I didn’t really see how the way we choose our mates was relevant to my original post here.
"This is idiotic. You say that it should not matter, but then go on to babble about how obese people should basically suck it up and live with nearly universal societal scorn because “they could do something about it”.
No, I never said that.
“Fuck you.”
I hope that isn’t a reflection of your maturity.
“Nobody should be held in scorn for anything they do or are that doesn’t harm other people”.
As I have already explained, when they begin bitching about it on my tv screen and to my face, then it starts to annoy me. Annoyance is harmful. “End of Story”.
I am reminded of two rules to live by I ran across once. “1. Do not try to be annoying. 2. Do not be easily annoyed.” I think you’re breaking both of these. After all, you do have the choice not to be annoyed by these people. So why don’t you just choose not to be, eh?
And by the way, the “fuck off” is not a reflection of my maturity, but rather a reflection of your own. In your case, it appears to be a terminal problem.
Doc, it annoys me in real life when my friends bitch about their hair all day long. Does this mean I get to discriminate against them and call them names? Do I get to call them lazy and call into question their very character?.
I noticed many of the people who are annoyed by the bitching are the same ones who would deny a fat person a job because they are fat. The message is: You are fat and lazy and it’s all your fault. You don’t deserve a job or even commen decency. And don’t bitch about it either!