Martha Nussbaum has a short-and-excellent essay on disgust in the Chronicle of Higher Education. A sample:
Disgust is distinct from both distaste, a negative reaction motivated by sensory factors, and from a sense of danger, motivated by anticipated harmful consequences. Disgust is not simple distaste because, Rozin has found, the very same smell elicits different disgust reactions depending on the subject’s conception of the object. Subjects sniff decay odor from two different vials, both of which in reality contain the same substance; they are told that one vial contains feces and the other contains cheese. (The real smells are confusable.) Those who think that they are sniffing cheese usually like the smell; those who think they are sniffing feces find it repellent and unpleasant. It is the subject’s conception, rather than the sensory properties of the object, that primarily determines the disgust response.
Nor is disgust the same as perceived danger. Dangerous items (for instance, poisonous mushrooms) are tolerated in the environment, as long as they will not be ingested; disgusting items are not. When danger is removed, the dangerous item will be ingested: Detoxified poisonous mushrooms are acceptable. But disgusting items remain disgusting even when all danger is removed. People refuse to eat sterilized cockroaches; many, Rozin has shown, object even to swallowing a cockroach inside an indigestible plastic capsule.
Nussbaum also relates disgust to bigotry:
Thus throughout history certain disgust properties — sliminess, bad smell, stickiness, decay, foulness — have repeatedly and monotonously been associated with, indeed projected onto, people by reference to whom privileged groups seek to define their superior human status. The stock image of the Jew, in anti-Semitic propaganda, was that of a being with a disgustingly soft and porous body, womanlike in its oozy sliminess, a foul parasite inside the clean German male self. Hitler described the Jew as a maggot in a festering abscess, hidden away inside the apparently clean and healthy body of the nation.
Similar disgusting properties are traditionally associated with women. In more or less all societies, women have been vehicles for the expression of male loathing of the physical and the potentially decaying. Taboos surrounding sex, birth, menstruation — all express the desire to ward off something that is too physical, that partakes too much of the secretions of the body.
Consider, finally, the central locus of disgust in today’s United States, male loathing of the male homosexual. Female homosexuals may be objects of fear, or moral indignation, or generalized anxiety, but they are less often objects of disgust. Similarly, heterosexual females may feel negative emotions toward the male homosexual — fear, moral indignation, anxiety — but again, they rarely feel emotions of disgust. What inspires disgust is male fear of anal penetration: of breaking down the sacred boundary against stickiness, ooze, and death. The presence of a homosexual male in the neighborhood inspires the thought that a man might himself be contaminated. The very look of such a male is itself contaminating — as we see in the extraordinary debates about showers in the military.
Does disgust, then, contain a wisdom that steers law in the right direction? Surely the moral progress of society can be measured by the degree to which it separates disgust from danger and indignation, basing laws and social rules on substantive harm, rather than on the symbolic relationship an object bears to our anxieties.
I highly recommend reading Jason of Positive Liberty’s post on Nussbaum’s essay:
The disgust that many people feel toward homosexuals may also explain why Biblical injunctions against homosexuality remain a part of fundamentalist Christian discourse today, while the prohibitions against usury, divorce, and swearing are routinely ignored–even despite these others being far more direct and unequivocal than the prohibitions against homosexuality. Usury simply isn’t disgusting.
Jason’s post expands on the analogy between historic prejudice against jews and current prejudice against gays, and he makes a very convincing case. Here’s just a sample, but you really should go read the whole thing:
Don’t get me wrong: Neither the ex-gay movement nor the Jewish conversion movement contained any overt hatred for the groups they sought to influence. Then as now, these movements claim only to love the people they wish to change. They want to help these poor unfortunates, these dear, suffering, fallen brothers.
They know that these people have made a terrible mistake, but they can see the good within all of us. They know that it takes a lot to own up to a colossal mistake–like homosexuality or Judaism–and they so hope that we have the courage to admit it. Above all, they know what’s right for us–and they know that their love is stronger than all of our problems.
It’s fascinating, though, which side has a monopoly on “love,” and which side gets all the “problems.”
I think Nussbaum is mistaken, however, to say that straight male prejudice against gay men is “the central locus of disgust in today’s United States.” I don’t want to play “let’s rank the oppressions.” Nonetheless, a huge portion of the moralizing disgust and shame (Nussbaum links the concepts of disgust and shame in her article) in the US today is directed at fat people. From an article in California Monthly (via Big Fat Blog):
Boero, a Cal graduate student in medical sociology, studies the messages conveyed by the health profession and the media about obesity. She claims that labeling obesity an “epidemic” is unleashing a new wave of blame and guilt toward fat people, and notes that obesity rates are higher among groups that already experience other forms of discrimination, including the poor and African-Americans.
“The focus has been on how to make fat people thin, not how to make fat people healthy,” she says. Studies by the Cooper Institute in Houston have shown that fat people who exercise regularly perform better on treadmill-fitness tests than thin people who don’t. But we automatically assume fat people are unhealthy, says Boero. “We also automatically assume that thin people are healthy. Health is the new moralism, the way to know people’s worth.”
In fact, although Nussbaum herself doesn’t say anything about anti-fat bigotry, I think her article may nonetheless be the best analysis of anti-fat bigotry I’ve read in years.
Good points and all, but “…stickiness, ooze…” wtf? Last I checked, all sex involved a certain amount of stickiness and “ooze,” not just gay sex.
Though it’s been quite a while since I was involved in straight sex so maybe my memory fails me.
All right, so I get caught up on the little things. Like someone using the word “ooze” in an otherwise good article. Use words with dignity!
I’m a fat guy, and I think I disagree, but it’s complicated. Using the discriptions in this post, I think “distaste” is a better description of reactions to fat people than “disgust”. People don’t like to look at us – hell, I don’t like looking at me – and jokes about fat people certainly are acceptable in a way that jokes about other groups are not. But I cannot say that I have ever been discriminated against because I’m fat, or that anyone has disregarded my opinions because I’m fat, or that I have ever been avoided because I’m fat. And even though it hurts to hear fat jokes, I have never felt they attacked me as “hate speech”: There is no implicit threat the way there can be (not always, but sometimes) in jokes about women, minorities, or gays. While those groups needed civil rights movements, I do not feel we fat people do. I am ambivilent about “fat acceptance”. Is it wrong for society to treat fat people as it does? Sure. But obesity has huge health problems for which the obese share at least partial responsibility.
Thanks for the link. A couple of observations:
–I too had some trouble with Nussbaum’s assertion that gay men are the “central locus” of disgust in the United States. I think it depends a lot on who you ask.
–The word ooze strikes me as perfectly acceptable to convey the emotions that she’s getting at. In a way, it’s poetic, inspired even.
–On fat acceptance: I’d never really thought of it that way. I’ve clearly got a lot more thinking to do on the subject…
Last time I read up on this, my impression was that immobility had huge health problems, and (once those are factored out of the equation) obesity had comparatively small and/or rare health problems. Being obese can be a sign of immobility (by which I mean lack of exercise), but when it isn’t it’s not such a big health deal. Mobile fat people are healthier than immobile thin people. So the health angle really doesn’t justify the anti-obesity movement. People’s reactions to fat (as opposed to immobility) are IMHO pretty much irrational and/or mistaken…
1. Transsexuals, gay men, and to a lesser extent lesbians, are fairly common targets of assault and murder by strangers, whereas fat people are not bashed or murdered for being fat. So I think Nussbaum is on target re: “most disgusting” in American culture, at least as far as lethal consequences.
2. Opinions about fat and obesity have a very strong class component – “you can never be too rich or too thin”. Much of the fat prejudice in this country is related to the opinion that “it is low class to be fat.”
3. There is a “freak” component to general disgust at extreme obesity – I am talking greater than 300# for a 5’0″ woman, greater than 500# for a 5’8″ man – the sort of weight when facial features start disappearing or become markedly distorted (and I think that is key, since “funny-looking” faces provoke more of an emotional response than other bodily changes).
4. Fat disgust is highly gender-correlated. Fat women are considered more disgusting than fat men. Wierd, since fat women are more reproductively fit than supermodels, who may not even menstruate if they are thin enough.
5. Fat annoyance is pretty common in coach cabins of aircraft. I am genetically skinny, and I find seats a bit crowded on a long flight. I admit that I hope for an average sized seat neighbor, since the larger ones spill over into a small space. I also hope for a seat in front of an adult or older non-seat-kicking child, and a seat in back of someone who doesn’t recline it fully (I don’t recline seat), so don’t feel too offended. I do sympathize with the other sardines of all sizes.
I’m so glad to see someone else making the connection between disgust (as described in Nussbaum’s article) and the current “War on Obesity.” Kim Chernin’s book “The Obsession” which was published back in the early 1980’s also makes similar connections in a very convincing way.
And I agree that women are greater targets of fat-based disgust/discrimination than men, the logical extension of the cultural disgust of female bodies as described by Chernin and Nussbaum.
NancyP, you assert that fat people are not targeted with hate crimes. I don’t believe that express records are actually kept on the matter. but I think anyone can attest to seeing overweight children being physically assaulted by other students. I also think that most of us would be fairly certain that behavior continues well into adulthood.
I won’t speak to comparitive frequency of anti-gay and anti-obese violence, but I imagine both would be more frequent than would be documented anyway
To see a good example of how fairly subtle anti-Semitic stereotypes can be transferred to gays, look at Scalia’s dissent in the Colorado Amendment 2 case. He goes on for several sentences about how gays are richer, better connected, and concentrate in certain neighborhoods, and thus exert an unfair and disproportionate political pull that is somehow undemocratic. The language is full of suggestions of insinuation, improper influence, behind the scenes illicit power, etc…all ideas that were developed and honed in the great anti-Semitic campaigns of the 19th and 20th century.
As with Jews, most of what he implies is simply false, of course.
Implying prejudice exists towards obesity misses the mark. All of society is damaged in innumerable ways because of obesity. The medical profession has reached a consensus excess weight costs billions in unnecessary health care and lost work productivity. Cancer, cardio-vascular disease, adult onset of diabetes, vascular problems in the lower extremities and orthopedic damage are all far, far more prevalent in the obese than lean, or even too thin people. My health insurance costs are more expensive in large measure because of the obese. As to the obese being overweight and simultaneously fit, that contention doesn’t negate all the health risks and ailments they suffer from by merely being obese. An overweight person can run all they want on a treadmill, but their risk factor for diabetes, some cancers and the skeletal problems inherent in obesity will not just disappear. The studies of Kinesiology, dietary nutrition and human metabolism all indicate every obese person, excepting a very few suffering from certain glandular or other ailments, will lose weight through a combination of lower caloric intake and increased physical activity. Hence the vast majority of obese people are actually choosing to be obese. In turn they are choosing to be sick, eventually, in greater numbers than those choosing not to be obese. Why should we insure those choosing to be sick? Should employers be required to hire a person who by their obvious obesity announces in advance they will likely consume a disproportionate chunk of the company’s health care dollar, in addition to the resulting lost hours of work resulting from their condition? No, I think society’s prejudice towards the obese is very logical, even justified. We didn’t choose their disability, they did.
Well, steve, the majority of your assumptions are erroneous (and bigoted), but I’m only going address one at this point. The biggest reason that health care costs are rising is the rapidly rising cost of prescription drugs. That coupled with an aging population (who are more apt to need medical treatments and those expensive prescription drugs) is often cited as the area of greatest increase when it comes to health care costs.
psue, if pressed to locate and cite accepted medical studies for my assertions I can do so. Can you in turn cite medical studies indicating the incidence of heart disease, cancers, diabetes, lower limb vascular disease and orthopedic/skeletal ailments occurring in equal frequency in humans regardless of the presence of obesity as a factor?
Steve,
So I guess we should all take methamphetamines (and or cocaine) and smoke cigarettes to stay thin and “healthy”.
One of the reasons the cost of your health insurance is so high is that pharmaceutical companies represent one of the largest lobbying groups in Washington, D.C. The global pharmaceutical companies are charging the U.S. more, because they can, thanks to the FDA. Basically, the drugs are manufacured globally, and are exactly the same whether they go to Mexico, Africa, Canada or the U.S. We have the distinction of being the lucky ones to subsidize the R&D of the global pharmaceutical companies through higher prices, because they can lobby the FDA through our Executive and Congressional branches. The drugs you get in Europe or Canada are the same that you can get here. Why would they make different grades of drugs for different countries? It would not be cost effective. As to your other statements, I am thrilled that I don’t work with you or for you.
spot
spot, methamphetamines, cocaine and cigarettes consumed to get lean? Where did I suggest such a notion? A cursory reading of my comments suggest proper nutrition, lowered caloric intake and increased physical activity. I realize these are methods and a strategy obese people avoid implementing on a consistent, long-term basis. How do I know that? Because if they did the vast majority of them would ceases to be obese. You also, like other commenters, willfully choose not to confront the cost of obesity to society and the health care system. Can you address that, conceding Big Pharma also adds unnecessary costs to health care? >>> “The costs of obesity’s consequences are growing as rapidly as Americans’ weight.
Direct costs now account for $93 billion a year in added medical expenses, far beyond the $76 billion annual tab for smoking-related care. Annual medical costs for the obese are $732 (37.7 percent) higher than for the lean, according to one new CDC report. In the Medicare population, obese beneficiaries cost $1,486 a year more; in the Medicaid population, the difference is $864 a year.
In a report published earlier this year in Health Affairs, Roland Sturm, a health care economist at Rand, concluded that an analysis of 10,000 responses to a survey showed that the obese — well above 20 percent of the population — spend 36 percent more on health care services and 77 percent more on medications. To put those numbers in perspective, smokers use 21 percent more services and demand 28 percent more drugs.” >> http://www.managedcaremag.com/archives/0407/0407.obesity.html
The obese damage society. Period.
Interesting. I blogged on Nussbaum’s general ideas of disgust as it applies to misogyny a couple of weeks ago, and I contrasted it with the notion of “dignity of women”, a term which is largely used by conservatives of various types (from Cardinal Ratzinger to islamic fundamentalists), and suggested that the dignity of women is just another way of saying that women let loose are undignified, maybe even disgusting.
And other stuff like that.
But more generally, Nussbaum writes a lot about this in her recent book, and many of her ideas do ring a bell, especially when I’m reading old Christian writers.
Amp –I saw Nussbaum on a tour where she gave the lectures that eventually made up the bulk of her new book, Hiding from Humanity, and, IIRC, she spoke of the need to extend the right to reasonable accommodation from the disabled to the short and the obese. “But whenever I broach the subject with my colleauges in Chicago, they assure me that the idea is a nonstarter.”
Anti-fat bigotry? I’m sorry, but HEALTH experts DOING their job isn’t bigotry. It might help “foster” bigotry. But let’s be clear, it wouldn’t much matter. People persecute fat people because they are aestheticaly unpleasant. Where fear of gay people is a completely psychological impulse, Disdane for fat people is not. People are designed (bad word, but nothing else fits) to see a correct body shape (relative waste to hip ratio is usually the primary determination of this. I guess I’ll cite Dr. Desmond Morris or the SIRC.) and they look down on people who can not at least come close to this ideal. I don’t much appreciate people who are doing a positive thing (trying to make people get healthy.) being slandered as fostering this. Fat people have ALWAYS been looked down on. This is absolutely nothing new.
Before someone who doesn’t believe in evolutionary biology starts flamming, Morris was educated at Birmingham and Oxford. Don’t pretend this comes from some guy at a degree mill.
Fat people have ALWAYS been looked down on?
So Reuben was really ridiculing his models?
Wow, Soul. I think your post sort if illustrates Nussbaum’s (and Amp’s) point.
steve duncan, yes there are several medical studies that contradict what you’re saying. As I’ve done most of my research on this topic in actual books as opposed to online, I don’t have them available to link. I will however suggest a reading list for anyone who is interested in something other than than pharmaceutical and weight-loss industry sponsored viewpoint:
“The Obesity Myth” by Paul Campos, and “Big Fat Lies” by Dr. Glenn Gaesser both cite several studies that contradict the commonly held belief that a BMI over 25 is a death sentence.
“The Invisible Woman” by Charisse Goodman and “Never Too Thin” by Roberta Pollock Seid (as well as Kim Chernin’s book mentioned above) give excellent analysis of the cultural development and expression of anti-fat bigotry. “Losing It” by Laura Fraser is an excellent exposé of the weight loss and “obesity research” industries (the latter being financially supported by the former, again evoking the adage, “Follow the Money.”)
I’m not claiming that there aren’t ANY health ramification of being larger. I’m just saying that they have been exaggerated and blown out of proportion. Interesting that one of the first time the rallying cry went out that “Americans are Too Fat!” was in the 50’s during the height of the “Communist Menace”. Now we have the terrorist menace, and a renewed battle cry against fat. Interesting how these distractions work.
Grace, which paintings by Rubens are you thinking about?
Just also wanted to add that even mainstream “obesity researchers” concede that the most commonly prescribed treatment for obesity (caloric restriction) has an abysmal success rate. Depending on who is citing the statistics, the figures most often given show that 80-98% of people do not achieve long-term weight reduction, even when exercise is added to the mix. There is a physiological reason for this: for many of us, our bodies percieve caloric reduction as famine, and trigger responses that lower metabolism, increase appetite, consume lean body mass, and cause any weight regained to be in the form of fat, in preparation for the next famine. So the very “cure” being offered is actually making the problem worse. I did see one study recently showing that for girls, the younger the age at which they started dieting, the heavier they were likely to be as adults. I may be able to find the link, if so, I will post it.
I was thinking specifically of “The Three Graces”, which you can see here:
http://www.abcgallery.com/R/rubens/rubens49.html
You can also view “Little Fur” here:
http://art-quarter.com/beck/joe/pablo/1/5/#issues
(the painting on the left is Rubens, the right by Cranach). There are not images of disgust.
To quote from the Tiscali reference site, “Women of ample proportions are sometimes described as ‘Rubenesque’. A full figure was a sign of wealth and social status, as poorer women tended to be thin from lack of food.”
And to address a couple of Soul’s points (now that my initial shock has worn off), first, Morris may have a fancy education, but most of what he says IMHO is still a crock. Standards of beauty, size and physical acceptability have varied widely over time and across cultures. For example in many Pacific Island cultures fatter bodies are considered more beautiful, as well as in some African cultures where women fatten themselves up for marriage. (And it’s interesting that in these cultures, the rates of ailments commonly linked with obesity are miniscule compared to the U.S. Maybe the stress of being stigmatized is contributing to such diseases as high blood pressure and even cancer?) Even as recently as 100 years ago in the U.S., Lillian Russell at 200 pounds was considered the greatest beauty of the day.
You say “Fat people have ALWAYS been looked down on. This is absolutely nothing new.” Actually, it IS relatively new in the course of human history, not universal in the least even today.
First of all, sorry for the multiple posts; I’m posting in between getting the young’un off to school and myself off to work.
One thing that stands out in steve duncan’s and soul’s posts is undertone of moral self-righteousness under the guise of health. I wonder why we don’t see the same moralizing against other groups of people who don’t actively take care of their health, such as those who refuse to take their blood pressure medication or participate in extreme sports? Again, I think this illustrates Nussbaum’s point.
My problem with the comments of Steve Duncan & Soul is that they seem to be using “overweight,” “fat” and “obese” as synonyms. They are not synonyms. There is no question that there is an anti-fat (overweight) bias that has nothing to do with the health concerns caused by severe obesity.
Oh, I also have a problem with the idea of people “choosing to be obese.” I don’t think that that is true, for the most part. I’d like to see the data that supports the assertion.
Lack of time for exercise or inattentiveness to diet are not excuses for obesity. I lead a very busy life, working 6 days a week upwards of 10 hours a day. I do all my own chores, laundry, car care, shopping, outside errands. I also volunteer for 2 hospitals and maintain a healthy relationship with my girlfriend. She is a doctor and even busier than me. Yet we both run 3 miles a day, row, lift weights, kick box and climb. We never eat an evening meal, closing off food consumption around 2PM. We both are approx. 10% body fat, as measured by a physician. Resting heart rates are 49>51 usually. Now, are we special? NO! We’re not. Our bodies are made of the same elements and governed by the same laws of energy and metabolism as all other humans. If you’re obese you’ve chosen and allowed yourself to get that way and stay that way. There may be a tendency for the body to fight weight loss initially, sensing famine or deprivation. However, eventually the simple laws of supply and demand take over. If you expend more calories than you take in you will lose weight. If you exercise while doing this you will retain muscle mass during the process. Your fat will go away. It is impossible to burn 2500 calories a day through exercise, eat only 1500, and not lose weight. To do so would defy so many rules of physiology and nutrition they’re too numerous to list.
Steve: Lack of time for exercise or inattentiveness to diet are not excuses for obesity.
I don’t know if anyone is claiming those are reasons for obesity. In any case, how can you account for thin people who don’t exercise and eat poorly? I’m genuinely curious.
As a side note, I must admit I find it terribly interesting that anytime just the possibility of fat discrimination is brought up for discussion, instantly a couple of people set out to blanket the discussion with so-called “facts” about how obesity is a choice, and how those Darn Fat People did it all to themselves. Whatever you believe about how people become fat, why do you feel it’s perfectly fine to HATE them?
Paul, I don’t hate obese people, anymore than I hate alcoholics, cigarette addicts, drug addicts or anyone else suffering from some sort of disability, addiction or deformity. I think they can be helped and become lean, if that is what they want to do. As to people claiming lack of time for exercise as 1 cause of obesity, and your assertion you’ve not seen such rationales, read “bean” in this very thread.>”Today, fat is closely associated with the low-class. The low class is often restricted to cheaper (processed) foods, they cannot usually afford a gym membership (let alone the time to go regularly).”
bean’s “lack of time” reference for failure to lose and keep off weight is commonly used by the obese to explain failure to achieve weight loss.
>Whatever you believe about how people become fat, why do you feel it’s perfectly fine to HATE them?
Along these lines, assuming Those Darn Fat People do cause your health care costs to rise (though this is most certainly NOT a proven assertion), I wonder if you also hate other groups who, it could be argued, cause your health care costs to rise: AIDS patients. The elderly. The working, uninsured poor. What about those other groups whom, as pseu said “don’t actively take care of their health, such as those who refuse to take their blood pressure medication or participate in extreme sports?” What about thin people who eat poor nutrition and do not exercise, and have health problems? Are you justified in hating them, as well? Or is it only the “unhealthy” people you can pick out of a line-up?
After all, hating and moralizing any group of people is going to encourage them to take better care of themselves.
As for your lifestyle Steve – Good for you! And guess what? My life is very similar to yours -busy, active, healthy . I eat well, I exercise regularly and love to do so. I’m going swimming after I post this. I work long hours for a non-profit organization that provides medical care to the poor and undeserved. I give to my community. But, by golly, my % body fat never dips below 35%, not matter how much I swim, bike, or run, though my doctor is entirely satisfied with my resting heart rate, blood pressure, and son. Hunh.
Shall I starve and maybe hit the Meridia so I can avoid being hated by you? Because Steve, that’s the only way I’m NOT going to be obese. But avoiding your moral indignity and your hate doesn’t begin to be important enough to me to do something that will truly put my health at risk.
Steve: I think they can be helped and become lean, if that is what they want to do.
Curious, then; what makes you classify it as a “disability, addiction or deformity?” Does classifying fat people as being a part of one of those three groups make it okay to provide suggestions on how to “cure” them? Why do fat people need “curing” at all?
In addition, I’m still awaiting your reply as to how you account for thin people who don’t find time to exercise, eat poorly, and are still accepted just fine by society because they aren’t fat.
Paul, if your “thin people” query were a poisonous snake you’d be dead. A thin person doesn’t manifest poor exercise and nutrition habits which result in obesity—they’re thin, not obese. Rightly or wrongly the obese are looked upon with some discomfort or outright disdain in America. Thin people generally are not. Hence they get some slack cut for poor health habits, if for no other reason than they’re not as evidently unhealthy visually. Is it right? Well, take two people, one thin and one obese, both with poor diet and exercise habits. I imagine the obese person is at a far higher risk of many previously mentioned health problems than the thin person. Being thin affords that person a margin for error that the obese person doesn’t have as to some diseases such as diabetes, high blood pressure, skeletal stress, etc. Life sucks and then you die. It just sucks more if you’re fat.
One of the main reasons it sucks, steve, are prejudices and erroneous assumptions like yours. Being thin doesn’t magically protect people from diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease or other diseases that you seem to believe only plague fat people. Maybe thin folks aren’t as subject to what you’re calling “skeletal stress”, but very thin, small-framed women are at *higher* risk for osteoporosis (one of the biggest health risks for post-menopausal women) than are women who are heavier. For people at all except the most extreme ends of the BMI bell curve, weight alone in not a signifigant factor in mortality.
Steve We both are approx. 10% body fat, as measured by a physician.
YOu know a woman with 10% body fat? My understanding is this is well below the healthy range for women. Last time I measured my body fat using my bio electric impedence scale, I was at 23% or so. (And I’m slender — 5’4″ between 125-130 depending.)
I’m curious too– why in the world do you stop eating at 2 pm? My sister exercises as much as you describe– she eats like a hog. A hog. Hekc, I eat like a hog. I exercise, but mostly nordic track lately. I have to go back to pumping iron. Then I really can eat like a hog.
I don’t think that amount of violence is necessarily a good measure when playing “rank the oppressions”. (A fun game!) The nature of the disgust tends to dictate the reaction. A straight man whose is disgusted by a gay man because the very existence of gay men causes him to question his masculinity is likely to strike out in a masculinity-asserting way, i.e. violence.
Whereas fat awakens other anxieties and provokes different reactions.
Oh yeah, I forgot the other line I wanted to comment on. You know, the one about overweight kids being picked on & that carrying through to adult life. Is that also true for short kids? Extremely tall kids? All other “abnormal” kids? I dunno, but it is an interesting idea. Of course the idea that the fat kid is the one to pick on may very well be influenced by our culture.
Common sense, folks. There are a wide range of humans out there. Studies show that markedly obese people have a higher risk of a variety of ailments, but the relative risk is in most cases quite small, and individuals in each category necessarily run against the trend (normal weight type II diabetics, perfectly healthy obese folks who are more active than the average American). Yes, I advise people to try to have a BMI of 25 or less. It isn’t the only or the most important thing – given the choice between overweight and smoking, please give up smoking and don’t worry about overweight! Ditto really excessive drinking – worse than overweight.
Oh, all kids out of the norm get picked on. Gays, fatties, the nerdy kid with all As, the girl who develops tits first in her class, poor kids, etc, etc. Kids are beasts when in packs.
My contention (way above in this thread) that gays were more likely than obese people to be the victim of hate crimes was geared towards criminal offenses committed against strangers on the pretext of membership in an unfavored class, involving serious bodily injury or death.
Geez people, you don’t get it at all. Yes, being overweight is for the most part not a death sentence. Yes, while you’re at increased risk for some diseases, they’re not automatic or necessarily fatal or disabling. Yes, society places too much emphasis on an ideal body, ideal being lean in stature. All those are a given. None of the above obviates the facts the obese are shunned, discriminated against, disdained or avoided, picked on, etc. There are many behaviors or states of being society shuns. You learn to change behavior or appearance for the sake of acceptance or in displaying good manners. Dress in dirty clothes, fail to bathe or brush your teeth or hair, pick your nose, scratch your ass, fart, belch, swear like a sailor in front of children, hit on minors in a mall, get falling down drunk in a restaurant. These are all behaviors or appearances society frowns on, and things we avoid doing to conform and remain, in a sense, attractive to the rest of the group. Whether obesity deserves mistreatment by others isn’t at issue, what is at issue is whether the obese will accept that their condition engenders the reaction it does and do something about it. Should you be able to scratch your ass in public without drawing condemnation? Yes you should, but you still don’t do it for fear of offending others. The obese can wail all they want about poor treatment but it’s not going to stop. If you don’t want the same stares and disdain that greet ass scratching in the grocery line lose some weight.
Jake S: My daughter, who just turned 11, has always been the shortest kid in her class. When she was in fourth grade, her class tutored the first graders in reading, and some of the first graders were taller than she was. (I just google’d up a growth chart, and at a casual glance she’s somewhere in the 20th percentile.) She takes some guff because of her size, which usually doesn’t last as those who try to torment her have discovered she makes up for it in ferocity. :D Would probably be very different if she were a boy; from what I’ve seen, short boys get picked on a lot.
What a sudden switch, Steve. Having been rebutted on the point that fat people are hated because they are a drain on the economy (higher health-care costs), you suddenly deny that that was ever your point. Instead, your point is that fat people are hated because they are … Disgusting. So you were really agreeing with Amp all along. Somehow, I had missed that.
Of course, you argue that it is fine (or in any case, an unchangeable given) to hate fat people for being disgusting, since it is only their laziness that makes them fat, despite the extensive research on the abject failure of dieting to reliably reduce weight, and despite the obvious fact that fat hatred is a recent cultural construct.
And we’re the ones who don’t get it…
One thing that I find somewhat interesting (returning to the main topic) is that a major focus of mockery and disgust in our culture is the image of fat people exercising. I wonder if this is tied to the idea that fat people are lazy and indolent (thus making a fat person exercising a paradoxical image) or if it is mostly simply that exercise generally involves little clothing and bodies in motion. The fact that athletic bodies are also highly fetishized (with the expectation that athletic bodies are lean) may play into this as well.
Charles, I think the need for some people to have a cultural scapegoat is a major part of what’s at play. It’s been my experience that the the very same people who (like steve duncan) insist that fat people should just “get up off their fat butts and exercise”, are the ones who are guilty of drive-by oinking and mooing noises whenever they pass a fat woman out taking a walk.
I wasn’t rebutted concerning the increased health costs or heightened risk of disease as far as I can tell. I think those here in denial about the perils of obesity tossed out some vague protestations, without attributed studies, that I was off base. They never produced anything definitive. Disgusting? Hmmmmm, never used that word. Hate? Nope, that one neither. Methinks you all doth protest too loudly………….
Ab-Normal,
My point was that it is currently impossible to connect childhood picking on to adult behaviour towards the same group. As far as I know, there are no studies on the matter of childhood picking carrying on to adult prejudice. But I’d love to see any that anybody knows of.
Steve,
What do you suggest exceptionally ugly folks do to end the discrimination that they face? It seems like your saying that those who discriminate either aren’t going to or shouldn’t change. That it is those who are the object of discrimination who carry the responsibility to change. I submit the theory that you are wrong on the most basic level of morals.
Steve,
I can vouch for the fact that Charles is very thin. He can probably do the same for me. So, tell me again what it is we are protesting too loudly about. Besides, everybody knows that all Alas readers are obese. Or is it fat? Or is it overweight? I’m really never sure to what you are referring when you use all those terms interchangebly.
All those things you mentioned, steve, can be fixed in mere minutes. How is being fat a “behavior”? What if a fat person changes the “behavior” and does what you recommend? He/she will get up in the morning and still be fat! To avoid disgusting people, should he/she stay in bed until he/she loses the weight? If so, how to lose the weight?
And, as a number of people have pointed out, “fat” is sliding scale. In some circles, anything heavier than anorexic is “fat”. In such a case, you truly have no choice other than drugs to “control” your weight.
I just wanted to tell steve that I’m actually the reason his insurance is so high.
Been in the hospital four times in the last year, probably will be there again pretty soon.
Heart attack, etc, etc.
I currently have a BMI of 17.03, though it’s been as low as 11.4 and as high as 21.28.
Those Darn Fat People!
Steve,
While you used neither the word hate nor the word disgust, you were very clear that fat people are avoided, discriminated against, and generally loathed (again, a word you didn’t actually use, but I think you have to accept that ‘etc.’ has a fairly large penumbra) because being fat is in the same category as engaging in any one of a number of activities which are specifically disgusting. What can be said to be wrong with ass-scratching or nose picking except that they are disgusting? They assuredly do not actually damage public health. Furthermore, you were quite clear that this state of affairs was one that you believed was natural and unchangeable, and that the appropriate response was specifically not for fat people and their allies to try to change this state of affairs, but was instead for fat people to either suffer the natural response to their disgusting state in silence or to become no longer fat.
In short, you think that fat people are hated because they are disgusting. In addition, you seem to think that this is as it should be (although you possibly think that the bar for what size of person should be viewed as disgusting is set too low in our culture).
What led me to the conclusion that you felt that your public health and economic reasons had been rebutted was the fact that you abandoned your attempt to categorize fatness with health damaging practices such as smoking and alcoholism, and switched to associating fatness with disgusting practices, and that you led off this switch with a list of statements about how you weren’t trying to overstate the health significance of fatness.
The major aspect of your health arguments that seem to me to have been actually rebutted is your constant (sometimes unstated, and sometimes stated) association of fatness with sedentariness, and the muddling of the health effects of fatness with the health effects of sedentariness. One aspect of your argument that has not been rebutted, but certainly could be, is your lack of recognition of the harmful health effects of attempting to lose weight.
And yes, Jake Squid is very thin. And both of us are very sedentary, and I am pretty clearly slated to develop heart problems early if I don’t change my lifestyle. However, no one ever guesses that, including health professionals (who note my blood pressure of 140 and ask if I have been particularly tense lately), and I am certainly not shunned or mocked on the basis of my future harmful effect on the economy.
Charles, I never abandoned any assertion obesity can be deadly. Your mortality is your own business, and if you want to rush it so be it. Just don’t ask the general public to share in the costs of your body abuse through higher than necessary health care costs throughout your life. Pointing out that thin people suffer the same health problems as the obese is a red herring. We’ve all heard the retort, when discussing the risks and damage of cigarette smoking and excess drinking, “My grandmother lived to 97 and smoked 2 packs a day of Camel filterless and gargled with moonshine from the time she could walk!”. Using the exception to excuse self abuse doesn’t wash. Sure, lots of obese people live long lives, but that in no way negates the proven medical fact that as a group they die soooner than the population as a whole, and suffer a greater number of several debilitating diseases or conditions. To protest to the contray is to deny established medical fact. It seems rather idiotic for a lean, thin person to talk to an obese person and say “There’s no good reason for you to lose weight. Look at me, I’m thin and have a bad heart, diabetes, high blood pressure, and bad knees, ankles and hips.” As to my statement that disdain for the obese isn’t going to change, what in that statement indicates it’s a situation I prefer or somehow contribute to? Society is going to think what it thinks without Stevie’s help, I’m merely stating the obvious and postulating it’s not going to change. I could say there’s always going to be a substantial resentment to homosexuality in America. Does saying it mean I hate gays, or want that resentment to continue? A review of this thread shows a hell of a lot of denial on the part of the participants. Denial of the damage obesity does to the body. Denial of the cost to society and industry. Denial of the ability or need to lose weight if you’re obese. I’ve dealt with alcoholics, nicotine and drug addicts, obsessive compulsives, narcissists, the chronically unemployed and others with persistant behaviorial problems. Generally speaking denial is the major issue they need to overcome to affect change. It’s no different for the obese. Some here would deny that denial is bad, since the obese are just fine in denial and staying overweight. That’s OK, but what it really boils down to is being too damn lazy, undisciplined and caring about yourself to cut down on your food intake and exercise. You’re OK with being fat and you just wish we’d all be OK with you being fat also.
“Sure, lots of obese people live long lives, but that in no way negates the proven medical fact that as a group they die soooner than the population as a whole,”
Actually, this ISN’T a “proven medical fact”. According to the Seven Countries Study, which studied mortality rates for men from the U.S. Japan, Finland, Italy, Greece, Netherlands and former Yugoslavia, the highest mortality rates were among the thinnest men, regardless of whether or not they smoke. Men in the 25-29 BMI range (considered overweight by current definitions) had no increased mortality. Men in the 30+ BMI range had a slight increase in mortality, but their mortality rates were still below those of the thinnest men. (from the study “Underweight and Overweight in Relation to Mortality Among Men Aged 40-49 and 50-59 Years: The Seven Countries Study”, American Journal Epidemiol 151, 660-66 (2000). )
The study from which the “300,000 deaths annually” figure originated, “Annual Deaths Attributable to Obesity in the United States” (JAMA, 1999) shows that those with BMI’s of 20 have the same risk of premature death as people with a 30 BMI. To further shoot holes in the 300K number, 78% of annual deaths in the U.S. are among people over 65. From 2.3 million annual deaths in U.S. this leaves 500,000 annual deaths total for people under 65. That’s 500,000 for ALL causes of death, including smoking, auto accidents, homicides, other accidents, illnesses, drug abuse, etc. Hard to believe that a BMI over 25 is responsible for 3/5ths of those 500,000!
“Overweight, Obesity and Mortality from Cancer” (NEJM, 2003) made a splash in the media (and among weight loss companies) as “proving” the link between weight in cancer, when in reality what the data actually showed was that the LOWEST cancer mortality rates were among people with BMI’s of 25-29, and that people weighing 35-70 pounds more than the recommended maximum weights had only one more cancer death per 2000 people than the “ideal weight” subjects.
Hardly the dire consequences you’re proposing, Steve. In fact, from these and other studies examined in the books I mentioned above, it seems that in general, the LOWEST mortality rates overall are among people with a 25-29 BMI (“overweight”) and only at BMI’s above 35 (the very heaviest end of the bell curve and statistically the smallest number of people who are labeled as “overweight/obese” by the U.S. government, do mortality rates increase signifigantly.
Steve, if you think most fat folks haven’t tried countless times to lose weight, you’re the one in denial. The fact that I mentioned above that the very “treatment” most commonly suggested to reduce weight fails in 80-98% of cases (and this is well-documented too).
Steve, can you please define your terms? Is overweight the same as obese? Is fat the same as overweight? I don’t think anybody will deny that there are significant health problems related to severe (or morbid) obesity. I don’t think, however, that there are significant health problems with being “fat,” or being “overweight.”
As I understand it, obese means “…an excess of body fat that frequently results in a significant impairment of health.” That is not the same as “fat.” We are talking about discrimination against fat people. People who are not adding to the cost of your health insurance. (By the who, the cost of your health insurance has skyrocketed for a number of reasons. Among the biggest are; cost of covering the uninsured, decline of the stock market, rising pharmaceutical costs, the need to bring large dividends to stockholders.)
To take the discussion a little distance away from ad hominems / feminams and medical discourse: the subrational aspects of the anti-obesity discourse exemplified by Steve Duncan parallel the right-wing political arguments against welfare and affirmative action. Now that the Right’s dismantled welfare and pithed affirmative action, they need a new target, one that not fortuituously overlaps to a large degree with the elderly, the lower-income and underclass, and minorities, and with women (subjectively, by model / actress standards).
Should we blame individuals or should we blame a society that makes health care into a privilege, not a right, for those who can afford it, and that makes health a sign of privilege, of virtue and righteousness, rather than a right? As a privilege, the cultural construct of “health” is to be assigned only to those who conform to standards of a “healthy” appearance.
I don’t need to add to other structural causes of the “epidemic”: long working hours at sedentary jobs, stress in the workplace, Big Food, urban flight and suburban sprawl, the resulting car culture, two-income or single-parent families in which as a result the children are pacified with food.
As a former anorectic / exercise bulimic (I am now of normal weight for my height — 5′ 1″, 105 pounds) I freak out whenever I come across the “anti-obesity” moral panic. I am sure that the panic will not reach the people it is most intended to targe and claims to care most about; instead it will be used to reinforce class and ethnic hierarchies, and the people who take it most to heart will be upper-middle-class white women. In short the panic will likely contribute to an epidemic of anorexia and bulimia. We are told that the Caloric Restriction cult members are not anorectic, yet a woman who consumes 1,200 calories a day is praised in a recent Time article for extending her lifespan.
The whole panic about health and longevity strikes me as a narcissistic crisis, the culture’s and people’s inability to acknowledge that we all die and that it is cruel to blame those who die for their illnesses. If any here are SF readers, I’m reminded of Paul J. McAuley’s Confluence trilogy: in the third book, Shrine of Stars, the selfish and anarchistic “heretics” are obsessed with extending their individual lives and parade the slogan Everyone Now Living May Never Die.
Steve Duncan does not seem like a healthy person mentally; at best he himself shows “obsessive-compulsive and narcissistic” traits. A person who is non-neurotic about their body would be accepting of others and not need to pile onto an entire group with ad hominems. Some years ago I would have been the one trolling.
And yes, I’m aware that as a thin person I probably sound patronizing, the equivalent of a “limousine liberal” to the self-identified fat people here; I don’t have the right to speak for them.
I however do speak for my own experience, some five years of my life which were spent in a haze of hunger, exhaustion, overwork (at school) and Ann Coulter-like viciousness (confined to my dead-tree journals). My disorder was partially triggered by the discovery that my father (who is Asian, nearly 70, and not particularly overweight by present standards) has diabetes, which is being controlled with medication at present. It was as if I thought that my compulsive pursuit of “health” could heal him. Everyone around me, though, could see that I was not healthy (I got down to about 90 pounds) and were afraid for me.
Sara, I also struggled with anorexia in my teens and twenties, and everything you’ve said above really resonates, especially,
“aspects of the anti-obesity discourse exemplified by Steve Duncan parallel the right-wing political arguments against welfare and affirmative action. Now that the Right’s dismantled welfare and pithed affirmative action, they need a new target, one that not fortuituously overlaps to a large degree with the elderly, the lower-income and underclass, and minorities, and with women (subjectively, by model / actress standards).”
and
“The whole panic about health and longevity strikes me as a narcissistic crisis, the culture’s and people’s inability to acknowledge that we all die and that it is cruel to blame those who die for their illnesses.”
Nail, hammer, bang.
Sara>>”long working hours at sedentary jobs, stress in the workplace, Big Food, urban flight and suburban sprawl, the resulting car culture, two-income or single-parent families in which as a result the children are pacified with food.” What a bunch of B.S.!! Rationalize, rationalize, rationalize!! When all else fails, and you’ve failed to corresct damaging, abusive behavior to yourself and others there’s always the old fallback coping strategy to explain your failings: RATIONALIZE.
Only reading the provided quotes, I found that it tried to make claims that simply aren’t true.
The fear of anal penetration is linked to ooze? No, I think it has more to do with the powerlessness of a ‘straight’ male when the feel they are viewed sexually by another person. If any straight man has ever been in a gay bar, the feeling of being scoped, of being sized up, given the once over, is unnerving the first time it happens.
But to Chess’s comment, being fat is unhealthy. Period. To compare that to an immobile skinny person is not a fair comparison. All things equal, Person A (fat) and Person B(normal weight) compared to one another, Person A will have more health problems.
sorry, Jake S., can’t resist an opportunity to talk about my kid, appropriate or not.
Now anorexia is a moral failing, too?
Anorexia is the only logical response to a culture that teaches that eating is an immoral and indulgent activity. As sara pointed out, many who suffer from it perceive themselves as morally superior to ordinary people who give into the disgusting physicality of eating. I used not to realize this–but reading a couple of pro-ana websites shocked me out of my complacency. Ann Coulter seems to be a good example–brutally thin, notorious for her unwillingness to eat, and viciously defensive of her belief that her whiteness and thinness makes her a better person than everyone else.
Sara, I agree with your assertion that Steve D. *does not seem like a healthy person mentally; at best he himself shows “obsessive-compulsive and narcissistic” traits.*
After reading his post about his daily regimen, I had that same thought. If a couple of needy toddlers were thrown into Steve’s bright shiny world, I doubt he would be able to maintain his strict regimen of exercise and diet. But since his 10% body fat girlfriend has probably stopped menstruating, the chance of something so disruptive as children interrupting his world is quite slim.
Spot, the world doesn’t grind to a halt because you have toddlers around. Despite the millions of parents succumbing to using childrearing as an excuse to let their bodies, reading, personal time and everything else go to hell there are many more who maintain some autonomy from their children. I’ve raised a child, and while doing it maintained my exercise schedule. My son is in pre-med, dean’s list. He also was taught how to lead a busy life and overcome distractions. He works 25 hours a week, goes to school full time, volunteers for 2 local youth groups, coaches youth league basketball AND exercise daily. I’m sure when he starts a family and has children he won’t balloon to a 46″ waist and slouch on the sofa. You and Sara are both rationalizing away the need or ability to maintain a healthy weight.
Steve, you say “I’ve dealt with alcoholics, nicotine and drug addicts, obsessive compulsives, narcissists, the chronically unemployed and others with persistant behaviorial problems.”
I’m wondering in what capacity you’ve “dealt” with these folks, and if you display the same attitude of moral superiority and lack of compassion or empathy. If so, I’m hoping you’re not in a cargiver or counselling role.
You’re worried I’m a caregiver? What of the others on this thread? I get the impression most advice to those suffering from various behavioral problems would go something like this: “You’re busy, you have kids, you’re stressed, society is designed to cause you problems. Sure, you’re overweight, don’t exercise, maybe drink too much, smoke too much. But hey, you can’t help it. Don’t even bother trying to manage your time, or watch what you eat, or get off your dead ass and exercise. It’s far too much to expect of such a busy, harried person. As your therapist I say just keep up what your doing. Seeya!”
Steve, you know that no one on this thread has advocated a junk-food, couch-potato lifestyle. To act as if anyone has is just plain disengenuous, and a strawman.
The one issue that has been brought up that you seem to keep ignoring is the fact that the majority of fat people who do “eat less and exercise” do not become (and remain) thin by doing so.
Many in the medical community are shifting their focus off of weight to advocate healthier eating and increased activity, and are finding that even though these changes do not result in fat people becoming *thin*, they do result in fat people becoming *healthier* (as indicated improvements in BP, blood sugar, RHR, cholesterol levels, etc.). So which makes more sense: advocating a result (fat people becoming thin) that can only be achieved by a small minority, and will often result in negative health impact on the majority, or advocating a result (improved health as can be measured) that can be achieved and maintained by the majority?
Or are you just interested in rationalizing your own prejudices and narrow judgements about people?
>>>As sara pointed out, many who suffer from it perceive themselves as morally superior…
Whoa whoa whoa!!!!!!!!!!!
Watch your generalizations there!
I’m offended.
I’m not morally superior to anyone. I starve myself. I’m messed up. Maybe society made me this way, maybe they didn’t–either way I’m not _better_ than anyone. Worse, actually, because I’ll be dead.
Don’t assume that the BS you read on ‘pro-ana’ websites has _anything_ to do with the “normal” anorectic. That’s like saying that the BS you read from steve duncan represents all ‘lean’ people. What you hear from Dubya represents all Christians. What you hear from the KKK represents all white people.
Steve’s right. People with problems need to be harangued more. As we all know, most people are extremely responsive to a good bitching out. Hell, I used to be hugely fat until someone yelled at me. Presto bango I put that burger down and woke up the next morning with 10% body fat. And two toddlers I’d never even seen before! Luckily, they can keep up with me on my twice-daily 10 mile run and good thing, too, because I hear the children of the less disciplined are turning into fatasses, too.
No, I didn’t mean that. I’m sorry. I realized later that I didn’t put it right. I guess I was just trying to point out that since our society sees fat as a moral failing, we have created a begruding respect for anorexia, one that you can see reflected in the pro-ana sites.
Does that make sense?
Amanda, you’re right in one respect to your venting. The children of the slovenly, the practitioners of poor nutrition, the sedentary, the alcoholics and smokers have a higher tendency to follow in the footsteps of their parents. Then they probably compound the damage they’re doing to their children by sitting around swilling Budweiser and sucking on Camels, complaining that if it wasn’t for taking care of the lil’ curtain climbers they’d have more time and energy to live a healthy lifestyle.
The children of the judgemental and prejudiced tend to follow in their parents footsteps, as well. Funny how that happens.
And another thing, if you’re subjecting your children to country music you’re a child abuser. Just thought I’d add that to the list of prejudices displayed here. Tim McGraw and Toby Keith are stars&bars hacks!!!
Steve — sometimes I try to come to your rescue, but you are on your on here.
Imagine this — my wife 5’6″ 120lbs and her sister 5’4″ 140. Same family, father was all-around regional nordic champion in Norway for seniors, mom is a marathon runner. Both parents drink an average amount of alcohol (for Scandinavians that is). Why the disparity in the kids?
I think your hypothesis is poppycock. People have genetic dispositions. My wife and I are in the same physical condition (both in the military), however, I drink on Saturday and she will beat me by 5 or six minutes in a three mile run on Sunday.
People are different genetically, what we need to do is encourage people to be healthy within their genetic make-up. I for instance, I do Cardio at 75% of target for at least an hour a day sometimes twice a day (if I drink or have a slice of pizza) just to keep fit. My wife only works out three times a week anymore and she would have 10% body fat (she was there before, but kept getting sick).
If I only worked out like you, would I be lazy? Or say I did not have time for another 10-20 a week job (that is what working out is), would I be lazy?
j, there is a rush to defend the overweight here. Some would have you believe most obese or overweight people are in their condition DESPITE practicing good nutrition and regular exercise. We know this just isn’t the case. How many overweight people do you see out jogging, in the fitness center, kayaking, climbing rock, etc? Those that do make the effort are to be commended, both for themselves and the examples they set for others. However the majority are in the shape they’re in precisely because of poor diet and fitness habits, not because of some genetic predisposition or metabolic imbalance.
>>My wife only works out three times a week anymore and she would have 10% body fat (she was there before, but kept getting sick).
J. If your wife gets anywhere near 10% body fat ever again, I recommend forced feeding with ice cream. That level is thought, by some, to be dangerous for women. It’s even pretty low for men. (I’m not surprised to hear if she was down to 10% body fat that she was often ill.)
Also: I would advise letting her eat that ice creame even if it’s past 2pm when steve and his girl friend stop eating! (I can’t imagine living by a self imposed rule like that. What for? )
>>How many overweight people do you see out jogging, in the fitness center, kayaking, climbing rock, etc?
Honestly? There are lots of overweight people at my fitness center! In fact, I’d say most the people at my fitness center are overweight. (And many keep coming– and really seem to exercise.)
I don’t kayak, or rock climb, so I have no idea how many fat people are kayaking. But since when are those required for fitness?
It’s been highly entertaining watching the foundation of Steve’s argument evaporate.
Steve: Some would have you believe most obese or overweight people are in their condition DESPITE practicing good nutrition and regular exercise. We know this just isn’t the case.
I don’t know if anyone ever put a qualifier (“most” or “all”) on it. I believe I said some because some people exercise and some don’t – but this applies to people of all sizes. Now, you’re saying that either the arguments of those who believe fat and fit can coexist are faulty, fat people are lying, or both.
However the majority are in the shape they’re in precisely because of poor diet and fitness habits, not because of some genetic predisposition or metabolic imbalance.
As in my original point, if fat is a choice, what makes it okay to hate people? I asked the question upstream and it went unanswered, other than your non-reply of saying, “I didn’t say HATE!” I’m not saying you did.
When all else fails, and you’ve failed to corresct [sic] damaging, abusive behavior to yourself and others there’s always the old fallback coping strategy to explain your failings: RATIONALIZE.
Whoa. Fat damages others? What, can I catch it like a cold? If I sit next to a fat person on a bus, will I become fat too? And abusive? Gee, Steve, this is some straw-grasping you’ve got going on.
Because I promised a link about 30 posts ago:
http://www.ucsfhealth.org/childrens/health_library/reuters/2004/06/20040629elin004.html
Oops. Try this one:
http://tinyurl.com/4yorc
10% body fat? Female fitness models have more than 10% body fat (so that the mucle shows in the photos). Nobody gets to 10% body fat working out three times a week, unless each of those workouts is hours in the gym and they don’t eat.
So I’m assuming Steve either pulled the 10% out of his ass, having no idea what normal body fat levels are and guessing (“my wife is thin so her body fat is 10%,”) or he’s lying.
>>10% body fat? Female fitness models have more than 10% body fat (so that the mucle shows in the photos).
Yep.
My understanding is the lowest generally considered healthy is near 18%– below that, most women have problems like amenoria, infertility, etc. A few rare individual women may be able to be lower for long periods of time– but that’s the flip side of a few people can carry a lot of fat and be healthy too. It’s an anomoly.
Models may cut for shoots, and be somewhat lower than 18% temporarily– t hat’s like body builders who win. (And the faces of women body builders during competition look drawn, Their faces look better 3 weeks later after they eat again.)
yeah, in case you all missed it (not that it’s really anything we haven’t heard before) Penn & Teller’s episode of Bullshit this week was on fat and exercise.
and the general answer is: there’s no excuse for being unfit, but there is a perfectly good excuse for not looking like a fitness model.
there ARE three genetic body types, and they govern how you’re gonna look, barring MASSIVE surgery otherwise. endomorphs (fat) ectomorphs (skinny) and mesomorphs (the “beautiful people”)
all three can be in great shape: if you want to be a champion powerlifter, you’re going to NEED an endomorphic body structure. if you want to be a champion swimmer, you’re going to NEED an ectomorphic body.
you’re not going to change your shape: no matter how good your physical condition is as an endomorph, you are going to look fat, and even the best in shape ectomorph is going to look skinny and wiry.
and both genders should fall between 15 (minimum for men) to 25 (top end for women) percent bodyfat. 10 percent is incredibly unhealthy for both genders, and carrying a grand total of 20 pounds of fat on your ENTIRE BODY is nothing to be ashamed of. fat is nessicary for your body to function.
now, I have a friend, he’s about 10 percent body fat.
he also suffers from a genetic thyroid disease.
10 percent is not something to be proud of. you need medical help.
unless, of course, it’s just some number you pulled out of your ass, in which case, shut the fuck up. I’m sick of mesomorphic assholes who act repulsed by fat (and they do) when, in fact, at 6’1” and 300 pounds, I AM in better shape than them, even if I don’t look like a model.
>>and both genders should fall between 15 (minimum for men) to 25 (top end for women) percent bodyfat.
No. Healthy women do and should carry more fat than is healthy for men. I think it’s important people know that, particularly since people tend to emphasize slimness for women.
You will find a range of recommendations. Sites for athletes tend to provide lower estimate; other sites tend to provide higher estimates. (I don’t know which are based on studies,because they rarely say.)
This is from sports medicine.com
Clearly, the association between low body fat and improved performance is not precise, and there is little evidence of performance benefits when male athletes drop under 8% and women drop under 14% bodyfat.
(One might speculate if sports performance is not improved, chances are health probably isn’t either!)
Later in the article ust as too little body fat can create some pretty devastating physiological complications, too much body fat can have equally harmful effects. Once men creep up over 25% and women over 32% fat, there is a dramatic correlation with illness and disease.
Earlier in the article they say: The average adult bodyfat is closer to 15%-18% for men and 22%-25% for women.
So note: 25% which is in the average range for women is in the borderline harmful range for men.
For what it’s worth, the large population demograpic studies show greater increased mortality with weight for men than for women.
Last I heard, women are actually _healthier_ when they are about 10% “overweight.”
Maybe I should find out what my BFP is. I suspect it’s been lower than 10% before.
Under 8% body fat can actually be detrimental to athletes. In the ’80s the NY Knicks had a player named Kenny Walker. Not a great player, but he could jump higher than pretty much anybody. And he had a fantastically sculpted body. One year he tried to play at 8% body fat. It didn’t work. After a relatively short time in a game he would develop cramps. This was generally attributed to too little body fat.
And that, folks, is your random trivia for the day.
“j, there is a rush to defend the overweight here.”
Steve,
Do not mistake the lack of support for your self-serving opinions to be a defense of the overweight. You are simply unlikeable and your assertions are plainly unpopular.
“Some would have you believe most obese or overweight people are in their condition DESPITE practicing good nutrition and regular exercise. We know this just isn’t the case.”
I can’t speak for most obese or overweight people. And I can’t assume I know who you’re talking about when you say ‘we.’ But I can tell you, however anecdotally, that I practice good nutrition and I exercise regularly and am a person who you would likely consider to be fat, overweight, even obese. It offends me that you would presume to speak about me or people like me as though you were an expert about me, which you are not.
“How many overweight people do you see out jogging, in the fitness center, kayaking, climbing rock, etc? Those that do make the effort are to be commended, both for themselves and the examples they set for others.”
If you were a member of my YMCA, you’d have seen me there regularly for the last three decades. If you lived in my community, you’d have seen me cycling, walking, swimming, bodysurfing, working, volunteering. If you went on vacation with me you’d see me scuba-diving, mountain-hiking, rowing and sailing. If you’d grown up in my hometown, you’d have seen me at swim practice year-round from 2 to 4 hours daily in preparations for the competitions I actively participated in from age 7 through 17. But to have you now assume that you know the first thing about my fatness and then give me a metaphorical pat on the head for my good-example-setting just gives me a queasy…nay, a thoroughly *disgusted* feeling.
“However the majority are in the shape they’re in precisely because of poor diet and fitness habits, not because of some genetic predisposition or metabolic imbalance.”
Steve, I cannot presume to speak for the majority of fat, overweight, or obese people any more than I would presume to speak for the majority of emaciated overexercising men like yourself. But I will tell you that I have a thin father and a fat mother. In addition to inheriting their blonde hair and blue eyes, I have inherited my mother’s hereditary form of arthritis as well as her predisposition to low cholesterol and my father’s hereditary degenerative disc disease. Thankfully I did not inherit my parent’s predisposition to poor eyesight or high blood pressure and neither my mother’s thyroid disease nor my father’s type 2 diabetes. I am lucky enough to have never spent a day in a hospital and do I require any particular medication. Yet my insurance premiums include a 50% surcharge because I am fat.
So Steve, when you start talking about how fat people (such as myself) are to be blamed for the high cost of *your* insurance, all I can think is that you are ignorant. I simply cannot think of another reason why you persist in defending such a lame, unfounded, bigoted argument. Your unhappiness with your income level is your problem alone, and its time you accept the responsibility for your own self-dissatisfaction.
Amanda, you‘re right in one respect to your venting. The children of the slovenly, the practitioners of poor nutrition, the sedentary, the alcoholics and smokers have a higher tendency to follow in the footsteps of their parents.
“Slovenly.” Now there’s a word with no moral judgments. [/sarcasm]
Interesting article I stumbled across yesterday:
http://www.dailycal.org/particle.php?id=15931
I was wondering whether anyone has studied whether or not slovenliness was passed from parents to children. Is there a metric for slovenliness?