The diet sodas *are * called “lite” in Europe, although if you see Pepsi Lite in England, generally someone’s selling off some Euro stock that fell off a lorry.
“Hi, Mal!”
I’m afraid I must confess that I, Vinyl <pauses to compose self, wipes away single errant tear, wonders whether camera angle caught it> am a former fat kid. By the standards of the day, at least; today I would be, while not exactly slender, certainly unremarkable against the adipose backdrop of my peers. This being back in the sepia-toned days when a restaurant’s “kid’s plate” resembled something a child might actually be able to consume, and the adult portions generally did not look like buffet platters requiring (of even the brawniest mustachioed waitresses) two arms to heft.
That’s great. Hooray for you. However, it’s pretty clear that the OP and others are talking about ‘fat acceptance’ meaning “I don’t need to do anything about my weight and how dare you say anything about it!”
I’m a size 16 and was up to a size 22 a few years ago. I worked at a Lane Bryant for almost a year. I can’t tell you how many people would come in and talk about how they’re REAL WOMEN unlike THOSE STICKS at Express or Wet Seal. Uh huh. Apparently, not being overweight means that you somehow lack ovaries and estrogen. Who knew?
When I started working out (while still working at LB), people would ask how much weight I wanted to lose. When I said I’d like to be a size 8, they’d say, “Oh girl, that’s too skinny! Don’t be unhealthy!” Since when did a size fucking 8 become unhealthily thin*?
The answer: it isn’t. It’s not unhealthy to try to be in a single digit size. It’s not unhealthy to lose weight. It IS unhealthy to be overweight, eat too much, never exercise and say there’s nothing wrong with being out of breath after walking 100 feet or not being able to pick up a 40lb sack of flour, rice, detergent, what have you.
It is unhealthy, as a society, to have so much extra weight in general that a woman who is 5’5" and 230 lbs can say, “I’m a bit overweight, but I’m not FAT**” and have people agree with her. “Normal” to most people now is actually overweight. And again, I say this as a fat chick.
- Especially since today’s size 8 is a 1950s size 12 or so.
** No one in specific, just a generic example.
Yeah, bit like Dawn French and her Sixteen47 clothing company, so called because 47% of British women are size 16 or over. As if Dawn would fit into a UK size sixteen if she was lost in the desert for a month. I have to chuckle at the suggestion that Terry’s have dropped her from advertising their chocolate oranges because the penny’s finally dropped that sending out the message “Eat lots of our chocolate and you too can be this size” might not be a selling point.
Still, fat isn’t necessarily unattractive. Even Dawn has a black and white art photo on teh intarwebs showing that with a gifted photographer and a fat girl angle shot that reveals practically nothing below the shoulders she could pass for a pretty girl some years ago and in dim light.
I’ve never noticed anyone “normally” overweight has trouble picking up heavy things. Is that a real phenomenon? (I use “normally” in an attempt to exclude people who weigh over 500 pounds or so whose mobility is hugely decreased.)
I meant as a fountain drink choice. Whataburger does, though! That’s probably regional, though.
I never heard the term “fat acceptance” before this thread. It seems like an obnoxious sentiment on either side.
Every literate person in the US knows that it is healthier to eat less, eat more fruits and vegetables, and to exercise. The facts are known. “Society’s” only concern is to ensure that the facts are out there.
What people choose to do with those facts is absolutely none of my business. If you want to live on a diet of Twinkies, corn syrup, and heroin that is your prerogative as a free agent. If you want to do that to your children, again your choice; children are constantly harmed by the poor decisions of their parents, and I see no way to prevent that without infringing on theirs and everyone else’s rights.
We can not get ourselves into the mindset that just because we socialize medical costs, some of us (those who believe themselves to be virtuously healthy) we can now regulate the private lives of the rest. This is especially true as we move to a more complete socialization.
And societal costs? The cheapest person lives to retirement age and dies quickly. The most expensive becomes disabled and then lives 100 years, with a heroic high-tech battle to prolong life the last few months/hours/days. And even if a hundred Federal nutritionists and actuaries somehow arrive at the most cost-effective menu and exercise plan for all Americans, I still would reject it because it involves regulating the most private of all actions.
Regulating what people privately eat, drink, and do, while ignoring their harmful public actions (releasing carcinogens, pollutions, CO2–not to mention the white collar chicaneries that can wipe out billions of dollars in a day) is LIKE EATING A VALUE MEAL AND ORDERING A DIET COKE) ha ha;).
Unicorns are not winged.
Thank you. I did not know that before.
However, it is still my assertion that yes, the vast majority of soda drinkers do drink sugared sodas, yes, no argument there. But I do not believe the vast majority of diet drinkers drink it because they prefer the taste. Most of us drink it out of necessity, whether it is because we are diabetic, or are aware of the approximately 160 empty calories in the average 12 ounce can and are trying to cut processed sugar out of our diets where we’re able. There are some palatable diet sodas, but less than half of us drink Diet Coke or Pepsi just because we like the taste. Just think back to New Coke , which was a variation of the Diet Coke recipe.
It might be a majority, but I doubt it’s a vast majority. No idea where to look for stats, though.
Prefer the taste when? Before I switched to diet, I preferred the taste of sugared pop. Now that I’ve accustomed my tastebuds to diet, I prefer diet. I don’t think this is unusual.
I wouldn’t consider the latter to be necessity. It’s a choice. I think it’s a smart choice, but it’s still a choice.
People tend to like what they’re accustomed to.
I suspect that is the case. If you look at diet drinkers that have been drinking diet for longer than (number out of where the sun doesn’t shine) say 2 years, they are more likely to “prefer the taste” and therefore may even drink it if the root cause of the initial switch is removed (they lost the weight they wanted).
If you look for root cause of the initial switch to diet, I suspect taste is very low on the list of reasons. I’d think “peer pressure” for teenage girls is higher, with “less calories” and “diabetes maintenance or avoidance” being the top two. There will, of course, be some people that always drank diet, that was what was around their house growing up.
Somewhere between the day you switch and the day you wouldn’t go back to regular soda if you “could,” is the day taste becomes primary. An interesting question I doubt there is an answer to (outside perhaps Coke’s market research department) is when does that happen. Its probably a bell curve - but what is the mean.
The other interesting question - probably also held in Coke’s market research vaults - is what percentage of diet drinkers have reached that crossover point? Personally, I doubt its the vast majority - but it might be a majority.
I was responding to Malacandra’s statement, indicating I do not necessarily disagree with it:
OK, I’ll agree it’s a choice, then, by people who are interesting in making healthier choices. But, I’ve been drinking diet soda for 10 years now, and I would still go back to drinking sugared soda if I could without feeling I was making a less-healthy decision. I still prefer the taste and mouth-feel of sugar-sweetened drinks. In fact, there’s a variety of Orange Crush which has a mixture of Splenda and corn syrup which has only 20 calories per serving, which I would be quite happy to see in other types of soda. Just because people become accustomed to something, not everybody necessarily prefers it, even after a sufficient amount of time.
Even before I switched to diet soft drinks, I stopped using sugar in tea because I hated the feel of the sugar on my teeth. So mileage on this one definitely varies! shudder
At a self serve fountain, I often did the “part sugared/part diet” combo - to get that taste/mouth feel without the entire baggage of fully sugared soda.
There used to be Pepsi Max (I think) which was diet P and about 1/3 regular, which tasted damn fine. Now gone the way of Jolt, probably because people thought it meant max calories or something shakes fist at dumdum marketers
Hah! We have it here still, and the marketers can take it when they pry, &c. Except it’s just diet Pepsi with a higher syrup/water ratio, and hence still calorie-free.
Tastes do change. I was on a big diet twenty years ago and went from two sugars in my coffee to two Sweetex to “ugh, too sweet” to one and then none, and to this day I drink it unsweetened bar the tiny amount of lactose in a splash of milk. As lifestyle changes go it’s pretty minor, but I like the taste better that way.
The trend of acceptance is mainly due to our increasingly over sedentary lifestyle. Driving everywhere, waiting for the prime spot opening up, drive thru’s, sitting in a cube infront of a monitor for 8h/day, remote controls not just for TV’s now but even thermostats, increased installations of elevators and escalators, and in some places hard to find stairs and sometimes inaccessable forcing the use of elevators and escalators. Also the food industry has pushed us towards all types of ultra cheap refined grains that are quickly broken down to sugar (and if not used right away converted to stored fat) with many of the micronutriants stripped in the refining process.
So because people made a mistake and fell for it, are we suppose to treat them like non-people?
Yes. Yes, that’s exactly what we’re saying. Saying that we think society is becoming over-fond of making excuses for obesity is just a front for our cunning scheme: the dehumanisation of the gravitationally challenged! We have already ruthlessly conditioned them into learned helplessness, through exactly the measures you cite: technological advances that render it impossible to get off their lardy backsides or eat anything but junk. Now we’re ready to strike. Second-class citizens today, slaves tomorrow, the soap vats next week, that’s the plan. (And what a lot of soap they will make.)
You realize, of course, that now you have cracked the code, you will have to be… dealt with. Nothing personal. 
fnord