Interesting article on the politics of Fat people

Pretty soon they will start propaganda campaigns promoting fat as sexy in a desperate attempt to propagate their filthy species.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Pretty soon they will start propaganda campaigns promoting fat as sexy in a desperate attempt to propagate their filthy species.[/QUOTE]

And even then fat chicks still won't want you
 
[quote name='Xevious']National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance.[/QUOTE]

Dan Savage (Columnist, "Savage Love") has an entire chapter on that organization in his book "Skipping Towards Gamorrah." From his perspective, it is an organization with little political motivation or movement, and he claims that their conferences are little more than meeting grounds for, *ahem* "chubby chasers."

It's an interesting article. Many people despise smokers for the health costs incurred by the collective (that is, increases in health insurance premiums for all people in order to cover the costs of those smokers whose health costs far exceed what they put into the insurance). I suppose that the same might be said of overweight people (though, on the contrary, if there is a discernable shortened life span for them, then they may help the solvency issue in social security, for instance).

One of the major shortcomings of this article is what is implied in being active in these groups. The article points out in the beginning that 9/10 Americans will be overweight (or was it 7/10?), but they don't point out how in denial many overweight people truly are (although they certainly could have gleaned that from the $46B spent annualy in the diet industry that they mentioned in the article). So, for instance, being black is a hard thing to deny; being a woman is a hard thing to deny; having an illness is a hard thing to deny. For many groups, forming a political constituency demands having a readily-available group of people willing to admit that they're downtrodden because of an unchangable character trait. The same can't be said of overweight organizations; while it would be rediculous for a black person to step away from a civil rights group and claim that they weren't black any longer, an overweight person certainly could.

I suppose I'll stop blathering now; I have reading to do.
 
You know, I've always been overweight, but I've rarely been fat. Overweight is an obnoxious term.

On top of that, what exactly is considered "fat"? When does one breach the threshold and break into fatdom?
 
[quote name='capitalist_mao']You know, I've always been overweight, but I've rarely been fat. Overweight is an obnoxious term.

On top of that, what exactly is considered "fat"? When does one breach the threshold and break into fatdom?[/QUOTE]

Well, weight isn't a very good measure, as someone 5'10" who is 200lbs can vary in terms of health; this also rules out BMI (body mass index) as a measure of being fat or overweight; roughly 90% of the NFL players are overweight using BMI as a standard (which bases its scores off of weight).

I always considered body fat percentage to be a reliable measure, though I can't think of the relative measures (over 15% is obese, I think). Maybe someone else has more information.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']Pretty soon they will start propaganda campaigns... to propagate their filthy species.[/QUOTE]

Strangely enough, today's fat people would have been genetically better-equipped to survive in years past (hundreds, thousands of years ago) than naturally thin people. Fat people aren't necessarily heavy because they eat more (that helps, of course) but rather because their bodies more efficiently save up and store calories than the naturally thin.

In days past even finding enough food to survive on a daily basis was challenging, but in times of famine, these people would have clearly been superior to and better equipped to survive than today's emaciated role models. My how times have changed. . .
 
[quote name='MaxBiaggi3']Strangely enough, today's fat people would have been genetically better-equipped to survive in years past (hundreds, thousands of years ago) than naturally thin people. Fat people aren't necessarily heavy because they eat more (that helps, of course) but rather because their bodies more efficiently save up and store calories than the naturally thin.

In days past even finding enough food to survive on a daily basis was challenging, but in times of famine, these people would have clearly been superior to and better equipped to survive than today's emaciated role models. My how times have changed. . .[/QUOTE]

From the article:

Contesting the usual origin story about fat—excess calories, individual blame—is high on the activist agenda. The preferred account is that fat is genetic and/or glandular, thus not anyone's fault.
...
Unfortunately, focusing on the food industry would put the preferred activist fat origin stories into question—unless the one-third of Americans who are now obese all developed glandular or genetic problems simultaneously in the '70s.
Click to expand...

Try again there Sherlock, the abundance of fatties today greatly outpaces the number of fatties in history. This points to the fact that it has nothing to do with efficiently storing weight, it's just that the vast majority of fat people just can't put down the chocolate-covered ding-dongs.

Think about it - if we were running from a lion on the grass plains "hundreds, thousands of years ago" would you rather be a lithe, muscular Kenyan runner or a tasty fat man teetering around on ankles that can barely support the weight of his bloated torso? I'll give you a hint - I'd rather be running next to the fat man :lol:
 
[quote name='camoor']Try again there Sherlock,[/QUOTE]
Wow, your logic astounds me. Please continue.

[quote name='camoor']the abundance of fatties today greatly outpaces the number of fatties in history.[/QUOTE]
The overabundance and easy access to high calorie food today also greatly outpaces its availability in past history.

[quote name='camoor']This points to the fact that it has nothing to do with efficiently storing weight, it's just that the vast majority of fat people just can't put down the chocolate-covered ding-dongs.[/QUOTE]
No, this points to the fact that people have much greater access to cheap, government-subsidized, high-calorie processed foods today than ever before in history. You're suggesting that within the past 30 years as much as 1/3 of the U.S. population just suddenly and unexpectedly became addicted to overeating?

[quote name='camoor']Think about it - if we were running from a lion on the grass plains "hundreds, thousands of years ago" would you rather be a lithe, muscular Kenyan runner or a tasty fat man teetering around on ankles that can barely support the weight of his bloated torso?[/QUOTE]
You missed my point entirely. I'm suggesting that there were few (if any) fat people in ancient times. The people who were genetically superior (could store calories more efficiently) had the extra stored energy available/necessary to outrun those who were merely thin at the time. One needn't outrun the lion, just the slower frail thin people of the time.

[quote name='camoor']I'll give you a hint - I'd rather be running next to the fat man :lol:[/QUOTE]
If you were one of the merely thin in ancient times, you would probably have been dead. :D
 
[quote name='MaxBiaggi3']The overabundance and easy access to high calorie food today also greatly outpaces its available in past history.

No, this points to the fact that people have much greater access to cheap, government-subsidized, high-calorie processed foods today than ever before in history. You're suggesting that within the past 30 years as much as 1/3 of the U.S. population just suddenly and unexpectedly became addicted to overeating?[/QUOTE]

I agree with you.

A fattie can't put down the "chocolate covered ding dong" food product - it's an symptom of a food toxic society, combined with a culture of weak wills and increasing PC pressure to accept people who are indulging in gorging and gluttony (even proud of such behavior - I can't explain that one).

[quote name='MaxBiaggi3']You missed my point entirely. I'm suggesting that there were few (if any) fat people in ancient times. The people who were genetically superior (could store calories more efficiently) had the extra stored energy available/necessary to outrun those who were merely thin at the time. One needn't outrun the lion, just the slower frail thin people of the time.

If you were one of the merely thin in ancient times, you would probably have been dead. :D[/QUOTE]

You're never going to outrun the lion if you're fat - you're going to have to stop, catch your breath, and get picked off like the weak juicy target that you are.

If you follow track at all, you'll know that the best sprinters are huge muscular people with powerful legs and very little stored fat. Even the best long distance runners in the world are kenyans who live in the mountains and are so skinny they look like stick people (not the kind that has multiple fat stores).

Taking it back to evolution - look at the American Indians who have those thrifty genes. In tribal settings these people are lean and mean, but in urban settings they quickly get fat eating corn dogs, fried twinkies and other horrors of American mid-west cuisine. The fact is that in a more natural setting, where they ate food such as raw corn and squash, these people had a normal weight. However in modern times their newfound obeisity causes health problems such as diabetes, weakened immune systems and low tolerance for physical exertion - attributes that would have meant death "hundreds, thousands of years ago".
 
[quote name='MaxBiaggi3']Strangely enough, today's fat people would have been genetically better-equipped to survive in years past (hundreds, thousands of years ago) than naturally thin people. Fat people aren't necessarily heavy because they eat more (that helps, of course) but rather because their bodies more efficiently save up and store calories than the naturally thin.

In days past even finding enough food to survive on a daily basis was challenging, but in times of famine, these people would have clearly been superior to and better equipped to survive than today's emaciated role models. My how times have changed. . .[/QUOTE]

Honestly it depends on the area. In cold places like Siberia or Norway, Sweden, etc. this would be the case. I find it stupid we think these genes are defective or some news broadcasts say so. These mutations occurred for a reason. Good point about the American Indian. Also look at the average Black person, MOST of them shouldn't be fat given their African backgrounds and the fact speed is sometimes a matter of necessity depending on where you are but especially in Africa where it's quite hot. In general it just makes sense from a surface area aspect that the person be thin since if you're in the desert or a hot climate you wanna sweat the MINIMUM amount of water to cool yourself because who knows WHEN you'll find your next drink of water, at least in the desert. It's a tradeoff, insulation vs. whatever you call cooling, whatever similar term it has to insultation. In a hot climate cooling is ideal therefore you need a fast metabolism to get rid of anything slowing you down HOWEVER in a cold climate you need as much insulation as possible including fat.
Let me ask you. Speaking of Russia, how many of you ever see a thin Russian or if they're close to thin are they as thin as the average European or African? Most likely no.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Let me ask you. Speaking of Russia, how many of you ever see a thin Russian or if they're close to thin are they as thin as the average European or African? Most likely no.[/QUOTE]

I've seen plenty. Many Russian women actually care about their appearance, and looking attractive for men.

Staying at a reasonable weight is more then just a health concern - it's showing respect for your fellow members of society. Noone likes to see fat people waddling around, or taking up the entire hallway/movie seat/airplane aisle and making everyone else uncomfortable.
 
[quote name='camoor']I've seen plenty. Many Russian women actually care about their appearance, and looking attractive for men.

Staying at a reasonable weight is more then just a health concern - it's showing respect for your fellow members of society. Noone likes to see fat people waddling around, or taking up the entire hallway/movie seat/airplane aisle and making everyone else uncomfortable.[/QUOTE]

As far as I can tell, it only makes you uncomfortable to see fat people. And no one cares about that.

Also, someone mentioned kenyans. The only reason they run so well is the high altitudes, meaning they have more endurance due to being used to less oxygen. If you were born there you'd have the same advantage.
 
[quote name='camoor']I've seen plenty. Many Russian women actually care about their appearance, and looking attractive for men.

Staying at a reasonable weight is more then just a health concern - it's showing respect for your fellow members of society. Noone likes to see fat people waddling around, or taking up the entire hallway/movie seat/airplane aisle and making everyone else uncomfortable.[/QUOTE]

You're missing my point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top