I could go to the local grocer today and spend five dollars for prepackaged meals (meat, vegetable, starch, and even dessert), at 2200 calories (of which more than 50% comes from fat), easily prepared and served. If I was to try to get all of the fresh fruits and vegetables, lean proteins, and other such stuff I am supposed to eat to be healthy, it truly is FAR more expensive, especially here in Wyoming.
I could go super cheap and hit bare minimums with nothing but potatoes, milk, and oatmeal, and that is certainly a bit cheaper, if uninspiring- I figure about 2100 calories each day would cost about $60/month per person.
Sorry that’s baloney, since you don’t have to “eat healthy” just for the bare minimum goal of “not being fat”.
You could live off of a diet of nothing but Big Macs and gummy bears like the fellow on the film “Super Size Me did” (who weighed only 140 lbs) as long as you don’t take in more calories each day than you burn.
So all you’d have to do is eat less of what you eat already if your only goal is to not walk around looking like a walrus.
Sorry but you’re off base here. Nearly all pre-packaged foods are more expensive per oz than whole foods are. Take a look at the price of a basic bag of rice, versus an ‘Uncle Ben’s rice pouch’ for example, and look at the price per oz, not just the ‘total price’.
Here’s an example list. You can get basic whole foods like eggs, lentils, rice, pasta, pinto beans, chickpeas which provide healthy carbs, protein, and other nutrients all for low prices if you buy them in bulk; frozen or canned vegetables are also an option.
Add on a few spices and seasonings and you’ve got a cheap tasty meal. Sure you might have to do a little basic cooking or boiling instead of just throwing it in the microwave, but claiming that prepackaged or processed foods are cheaper than basic whole foods is absolutely wrong.
And, no you don’t have to buy the highest end foods at the local organic grocer just to meat the bare minimum requirements of ‘eating healthy’ - if anything it really just boils down to eating real whole foods, and keeping the processed and junk foods to a minimum.
Lots of people have no grocery store nearby, and no car to drive to one. Some people don’t even have a kitchen or means to cook, and their only option for food is the nearby diner or McDonalds. Some people have such shitty lives, spending all their waking hours working or taking care of family, that literally the only pleasure they have is overindulging in food, and very few humans are capable of living with nothing pleasurable in their life.
This argument is unsupportable. Everyone has more choices than McDonalds. Heck, people on food stamps have more choices, since McDonalds doesn’t accept food stamps, AFAIK.
Some might not have much beyond McDonalds, 7/11, and similar, at least without spending money they don’t have on a cab. Others might be able to take the bus to the grocery store, but can’t carry more than a day’s worth of food back home. There are tons of permutations on this – some combination of lack of time, resources, transportation, etc., on top of bad food being a cheap pleasure for some folks with no other pleasures in their life.
I don’t think big corporations need to convince us to get fat. We’re evolved to get fat if it’s possible. We crave the taste of fattening foods. This wasn’t a problem when we were hunters and gatherers; fattening foods were scarce and it was a good idea for people to scarf them down when they could find them. But in our modern age, we’re able to eat all the fattening food we want and overindulgence is a problem.
If anything, corporations have an incentive to promote the idea that “thin is in”. That way they can get us coming and going. Our natural instincts will tell us to consume more food. And then marketing will tell us we need to lose weight. And corporations can sell us both the food and the weight loss program.
Why choose between selling the poison or the antidote, when you can sell both?
I was hearing about a fat acceptance movement back in the mid-1990s, and Wikipedia tells me it actually dates back to the late 1960s. I can’t claim to be an expert on the movement, but I have never seen any evidence indicating that it might have been invented by the fast food industry, nor have I encountered anyone but you suggesting that this might be the case. The actual marketing for fast food certainly does not seem to be glamorizing overweight people – it typically shows slim people enjoying their products.
I realize you are new here, but this board is supposed to be about fighting ignorance. If you’re looking for somewhere to promote your personal conspiracy theory, I’m sure there are plenty of other places on the Internet where people would find this sort of thing more compelling.
Certainly your OP would be a good example of such a trend, if it does exist. Conspiracy theories and the like focused on the secret manipulation of the powerful (or knowledgeable and therefore powerful) do tend to shift agency from “us” onto “them”, while downplaying personal responsibility of individuals into divisions of (usually) “sheep” and the knowledgeable yet strangely powerless victimised few among them.
Does fat shaming encourage people to treat themselves as worthwhile enough to care about or does it tell people to live up to someone else’s standards?
Ref the snippet above, you’re right as far as it goes. but recognize in most cases the corp selling the poison and the corp selling the antidote would be two different entities.
e.g. McD’s wants desperately for us to consider Big Macs a perfectly cromulent everyday meal. Nike wants to sell us lots of expensive shirts and shoes to sweat in. Two corps, two diametrically opposed views of which way the customer ought to behave.
I wonder how much of the “anti-fat shaming” movement stems from an attempt to get people - especially younger girls - out of the “really thin is in” (which is how a lot of anorexia nervosa cases begin) mentality.
I would guess it is multi factorial. Plenty of guys prefer curvy women. Plenty of women are tired of being compared to unobtainable and artificial “ideals”, as Meghan Trainor eloquently states. There have been trends over the last few decades to speak with more sensitivity and empathy. And there likely is a corporate angle to some of this for several reasons: food companies depending on sugar and fat to drive consumption, increasing weight of the population and market, people being jerks on social media because they have some anonymity.