Is the anti-smoking movement taking steam away from the fight against obesity?

[mlerose]

@Otara

The thing is you cant really do a ton of the things that worked for smoking to reduce it. Scary pictures on a donut dont really work too well as a concept, banning advertising for food gets trickier because defining 'good and ‘bad’ food gets awfully tricky, etc etc.

I’ll tell ya, nothing motivated me more to keep myself on my exercise regime and devotion to eating less/eating healthy like seeing the Body Worlds 2 exhibit at the natural history museum a few months ago. Everyone knows what a smoker’s lung looks like (or they should, anyhow), but how often do you get to see what a cross section of an obese person looks like? Ugh. It was the only part of the exhibit that truly disturbed me. We all know what obesity looks like on the outside, but to really see it on the inside just made me that more determined to stay in good shape.

[SailBunny]

Touche, Sailboat. I dont want to derail the thread, but I am admittedly irritated by folks who are rabidly anti-something, because they must have something to gripe/fight against to put some purpose in their lives. I am not talking about somethings like human rights/cancer/aids. Merely people who feel they have the supreme moral right to dictate the lives of others.

[Thudlow_Boink]

Insofar as the anti-smoking movement focuses on the risks to smokers themselves, the OP has a good point. Although in the case of smoking, there’s one specific behavior you can single out and tell people not to do, which makes it easier to preach against than obesity.

But the anti-smoking movement also focuses on reducing the health risks, annoyances, etc. to other people around those who are actually doing the smoking, which doesn’t really have a parallel in the obesity issue.

[Amaranta]

@Lissa

One thing is always effective: shame. I’m not suggesting that it’d be a good thing to do but social shame is a very powerful motivator. (It’s why the majority of women shave their legs and armpitspits.)

Wait.

What?

[Lissa]

@Amaranta

Wait.

What?

The reason why women started shaving their armpits and legs was that post-WWI companies were feeling the pinch from reduced sales after the Army wasn’t buying as many razors. Someone (and I don’t know who it is) came up with the brilliant plan to make American women ashamed of their underam and leg hair. Before then, women hadn’t given much thought to their underarm hair but the new fashions started to reval that area and suddenly ads proclaimed that it was something embarassing and vaguely dirty.

There was a Neet campaign in 1924 which read:

“Perhaps, because of an old-fashioned scruple, you have hesitated to rid yourself of the disfigurement of underarm hair. Are your arms constantly pinned to your sides? Or do you scorn to wear the filmy or sleeveless frocks that the vogue of the day decrees? In either case, He is apt to think you lifeless and behind the times. He will notice you holding yourself aloof from the swing of convention.”

(Italics original)

I’ve read that in the last thirty years an increasing number of European women have taken up underarm shaving, probably from some residual pressure/shame wafting in from across the pond.