my husband thinks that I am ungrateful
Replies
-
Verity1111 wrote: »KWlosingit wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »
Science disagrees with you.cerise_noir wrote: »
Drug addiction is not anywhere near the same as "sugar addiction". It irks me when the two are similarly compared.
No it doesn't don't be ridiculous. There is a big difference between being tempted by a food you like and a chemically addictive drug.
Comparing chocolate to heroine is insultingly naive. You know a lot of people who break open their child's piggy bank and hop in their car at 3am to drive to some sketch part of town and buy some Hershey bar only to be found later passed out in their vehicle still clutching the wrapper?
I've heard of people who tried to sell their kids or organs for drugs... Would you REALLY sell your kid for chocolate?
Well on some days I would give my kids away even without the chocolate!!KWlosingit wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »
Science disagrees with you.cerise_noir wrote: »
Drug addiction is not anywhere near the same as "sugar addiction". It irks me when the two are similarly compared.
No it doesn't don't be ridiculous. There is a big difference between being tempted by a food you like and a chemically addictive drug.
Comparing chocolate to heroine is insultingly naive. You know a lot of people who break open their child's piggy bank and hop in their car at 3am to drive to some sketch part of town and buy some Hershey bar only to be found later passed out in their vehicle still clutching the wrapper?
I've heard of people who tried to sell their kids or organs for drugs... Would you REALLY sell your kid for chocolate?
Well on some days I would give my kids away even without the chocolate!!
Chocolate is legal so you dont have to sell your kids. That's the issue. Do I believe people addicted to chocolate would "sell their kids" or risk their livelihood for it if it was illegal and hard to get/expensive? Yes, yes I do. Not me, personally, but some sick person would, yes.
There's no current evidence for addiction to chocolate in humans. You're basing your beliefs on rat studies, which don't translate to humans.
Human studies on sugar addiction haven't panned out at this point.3 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Since OP is no doubt long gone:Verity1111 wrote: »It really gets me when people say "have willpower". It is called an ADDICTION for a reason.
OP's post was not about addiction, it was about dieting. She likes chocolate and finds them hard to turn down. That's normal. It's not like being a heroin addict, that's ridiculous.
The answer, obviously, is communication. However, people suggesting that she should have been angry or resentful toward her husband and mother-in-law and that he was akin to someone bringing his wife who just got out of Betty Ford a bottle of her favorite wine and generally a bad, uncaring person are nuts.People who can avoid things with sure will power are not addicted to them.
Not true, actually. Someone who has had a problem with alcohol will be exposed to offers and gifts and ads and other situations that make alcohol look easy and tempting ALL the time. Saying no and exercising will power is essential. At first, is it sensible not to make it harder than it needs to be (say, not going to a wine tasting just to hang out), yes, obviously. Similarly (although I do not think it's the same thing), someone trying to avoid overdoing tempting foods might want to portion them out or avoid them for a while and not have them in the house, sure, absolutely. But the person will still get things like gifts or offers or the foods at work or social gatherings, and so has to learn to say no or eat them in moderation.
If I said I was "addicted" to sweets so cannot exercise will power, according to you that would mean that I was either doomed to be fat or had to teach my co-workers that we cannot have sweets on the premises and any sweet treats someone brings or we get as a gift from a vendor, etc., must be tossed immediately. That ridiculous and not feasible.
Just SMH.
Granted, not everyone has difficulties. You can't make blanket statements for all people just because your body is insulin sensitive or responds properly to sugar
In the same way that some people aren't sensitive to alcohol and some are, some are sensitive to sugar or other food sources and some aren't. If a person has a drinking problem, as in your illustration, then the spouse shouldn't buy a bunch of alcohol and hand the person a bottle to teach self restraint or encourage a shot a night until the bottle's gone.
People need to be able to deal with the cards they have been dealt with and their struggles need to be taken seriously.
If you actually reread my post, I said the same thing about chocolates and alcohol (although I think the comparison is ridiculous).
I think OP needs to tell her husband if she doesn't want food gifts (said that ages ago) and that it might make sense for her to keep chocolates out of the house for the time being. I also think that claiming she CANNOT handle temptation because ADDICTED is false -- I get tempted by chocolates at work all the time and if I couldn't figure out a way to deal with that, I'd fail. Same with alcohol. Consuming it or not is a choice.
(I also think she can probably learn to eat chocolates in moderation, but if she's not there yet, that's understandable.)
The equation of being IR and being addicted is honestly ridiculous and bringing this thread off topic.
And no, I find chocolates tempting too and want to overeat them sometimes. That's not, IMO, at all like addiction, but if you want to think it is, cool, whatever. The point, again, is that that doesn't make me (or anyone else) unable to deal with a gift of chocolates without eating them all, any more than I would drink a bottle of wine and say I couldn't help it if/when gifted with such.
I respect your viewpoints and agree with many of them. OP ate 15 chocolates and didn't want to. End of story.
That has nothing to do with whatever point you're trying to make.
If you have IR and there are chocolates in front of you, what allows you to not eat them?
I don't know what IR is? If chocolates are in a box sealed I don't care about them. But if I opened the box then I would have a couple. But then I'll graze on them little by little over time.
My deficit is too small to allow me to eat chocolate regularly. So I don't. If someone else owns the chocolate I can tell myself that they aren't mine and not care. If they are in the store I can say those are for someone else. But if hubby gives them to me as a gift and they are mine then I will eat them.
If I start eating them I get the familiar sugar rise, crash and cravings for more. If I don't then I'm not crashing and don't really experience any problems not having them. So I don't know if that is actually an addiction to sugar or just insulin spikes and drops?1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »KWlosingit wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »
Science disagrees with you.cerise_noir wrote: »
Drug addiction is not anywhere near the same as "sugar addiction". It irks me when the two are similarly compared.
No it doesn't don't be ridiculous. There is a big difference between being tempted by a food you like and a chemically addictive drug.
Comparing chocolate to heroine is insultingly naive. You know a lot of people who break open their child's piggy bank and hop in their car at 3am to drive to some sketch part of town and buy some Hershey bar only to be found later passed out in their vehicle still clutching the wrapper?
I've heard of people who tried to sell their kids or organs for drugs... Would you REALLY sell your kid for chocolate?
Well on some days I would give my kids away even without the chocolate!!KWlosingit wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »
Science disagrees with you.cerise_noir wrote: »
Drug addiction is not anywhere near the same as "sugar addiction". It irks me when the two are similarly compared.
No it doesn't don't be ridiculous. There is a big difference between being tempted by a food you like and a chemically addictive drug.
Comparing chocolate to heroine is insultingly naive. You know a lot of people who break open their child's piggy bank and hop in their car at 3am to drive to some sketch part of town and buy some Hershey bar only to be found later passed out in their vehicle still clutching the wrapper?
I've heard of people who tried to sell their kids or organs for drugs... Would you REALLY sell your kid for chocolate?
Well on some days I would give my kids away even without the chocolate!!
Chocolate is legal so you dont have to sell your kids. That's the issue. Do I believe people addicted to chocolate would "sell their kids" or risk their livelihood for it if it was illegal and hard to get/expensive? Yes, yes I do. Not me, personally, but some sick person would, yes.
There's no current evidence for addiction to chocolate in humans. You're basing your beliefs on rat studies, which don't translate to humans.
Human studies on sugar addiction haven't panned out at this point.
Here are some compilations.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
0 -
Pathmonkey wrote: »My ex husband used to do the same thing to me! (note his status is EX). He was overweight as well.....I just have to conclude he was sabotaging my efforts. Nip this in the bud now....it borders on cruelty.
Oh the dramz!!1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Since OP is no doubt long gone:Verity1111 wrote: »It really gets me when people say "have willpower". It is called an ADDICTION for a reason.
OP's post was not about addiction, it was about dieting. She likes chocolate and finds them hard to turn down. That's normal. It's not like being a heroin addict, that's ridiculous.
The answer, obviously, is communication. However, people suggesting that she should have been angry or resentful toward her husband and mother-in-law and that he was akin to someone bringing his wife who just got out of Betty Ford a bottle of her favorite wine and generally a bad, uncaring person are nuts.People who can avoid things with sure will power are not addicted to them.
Not true, actually. Someone who has had a problem with alcohol will be exposed to offers and gifts and ads and other situations that make alcohol look easy and tempting ALL the time. Saying no and exercising will power is essential. At first, is it sensible not to make it harder than it needs to be (say, not going to a wine tasting just to hang out), yes, obviously. Similarly (although I do not think it's the same thing), someone trying to avoid overdoing tempting foods might want to portion them out or avoid them for a while and not have them in the house, sure, absolutely. But the person will still get things like gifts or offers or the foods at work or social gatherings, and so has to learn to say no or eat them in moderation.
If I said I was "addicted" to sweets so cannot exercise will power, according to you that would mean that I was either doomed to be fat or had to teach my co-workers that we cannot have sweets on the premises and any sweet treats someone brings or we get as a gift from a vendor, etc., must be tossed immediately. That ridiculous and not feasible.
Just SMH.
Granted, not everyone has difficulties. You can't make blanket statements for all people just because your body is insulin sensitive or responds properly to sugar
In the same way that some people aren't sensitive to alcohol and some are, some are sensitive to sugar or other food sources and some aren't. If a person has a drinking problem, as in your illustration, then the spouse shouldn't buy a bunch of alcohol and hand the person a bottle to teach self restraint or encourage a shot a night until the bottle's gone.
People need to be able to deal with the cards they have been dealt with and their struggles need to be taken seriously.
If you actually reread my post, I said the same thing about chocolates and alcohol (although I think the comparison is ridiculous).
I think OP needs to tell her husband if she doesn't want food gifts (said that ages ago) and that it might make sense for her to keep chocolates out of the house for the time being. I also think that claiming she CANNOT handle temptation because ADDICTED is false -- I get tempted by chocolates at work all the time and if I couldn't figure out a way to deal with that, I'd fail. Same with alcohol. Consuming it or not is a choice.
(I also think she can probably learn to eat chocolates in moderation, but if she's not there yet, that's understandable.)
The equation of being IR and being addicted is honestly ridiculous and bringing this thread off topic.
And no, I find chocolates tempting too and want to overeat them sometimes. That's not, IMO, at all like addiction, but if you want to think it is, cool, whatever. The point, again, is that that doesn't make me (or anyone else) unable to deal with a gift of chocolates without eating them all, any more than I would drink a bottle of wine and say I couldn't help it if/when gifted with such.
I respect your viewpoints and agree with many of them. OP ate 15 chocolates and didn't want to. End of story.
That has nothing to do with whatever point you're trying to make.
If you have IR and there are chocolates in front of you, what allows you to not eat them?
I don't know what IR is? If chocolates are in a box sealed I don't care about them. But if I opened the box then I would have a couple. But then I'll graze on them little by little over time.
My deficit is too small to allow me to eat chocolate regularly. So I don't. If someone else owns the chocolate I can tell myself that they aren't mine and not care. If they are in the store I can say those are for someone else. But if hubby gives them to me as a gift and they are mine then I will eat them.
If I start eating them I get the familiar sugar rise, crash and cravings for more. If I don't then I'm not crashing and don't really experience any problems not having them. So I don't know if that is actually an addiction to sugar or just insulin spikes and drops?
I am assuming IR is insulin resistance.
0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Since OP is no doubt long gone:Verity1111 wrote: »It really gets me when people say "have willpower". It is called an ADDICTION for a reason.
OP's post was not about addiction, it was about dieting. She likes chocolate and finds them hard to turn down. That's normal. It's not like being a heroin addict, that's ridiculous.
The answer, obviously, is communication. However, people suggesting that she should have been angry or resentful toward her husband and mother-in-law and that he was akin to someone bringing his wife who just got out of Betty Ford a bottle of her favorite wine and generally a bad, uncaring person are nuts.People who can avoid things with sure will power are not addicted to them.
Not true, actually. Someone who has had a problem with alcohol will be exposed to offers and gifts and ads and other situations that make alcohol look easy and tempting ALL the time. Saying no and exercising will power is essential. At first, is it sensible not to make it harder than it needs to be (say, not going to a wine tasting just to hang out), yes, obviously. Similarly (although I do not think it's the same thing), someone trying to avoid overdoing tempting foods might want to portion them out or avoid them for a while and not have them in the house, sure, absolutely. But the person will still get things like gifts or offers or the foods at work or social gatherings, and so has to learn to say no or eat them in moderation.
If I said I was "addicted" to sweets so cannot exercise will power, according to you that would mean that I was either doomed to be fat or had to teach my co-workers that we cannot have sweets on the premises and any sweet treats someone brings or we get as a gift from a vendor, etc., must be tossed immediately. That ridiculous and not feasible.
Just SMH.
Granted, not everyone has difficulties. You can't make blanket statements for all people just because your body is insulin sensitive or responds properly to sugar
In the same way that some people aren't sensitive to alcohol and some are, some are sensitive to sugar or other food sources and some aren't. If a person has a drinking problem, as in your illustration, then the spouse shouldn't buy a bunch of alcohol and hand the person a bottle to teach self restraint or encourage a shot a night until the bottle's gone.
People need to be able to deal with the cards they have been dealt with and their struggles need to be taken seriously.
If you actually reread my post, I said the same thing about chocolates and alcohol (although I think the comparison is ridiculous).
I think OP needs to tell her husband if she doesn't want food gifts (said that ages ago) and that it might make sense for her to keep chocolates out of the house for the time being. I also think that claiming she CANNOT handle temptation because ADDICTED is false -- I get tempted by chocolates at work all the time and if I couldn't figure out a way to deal with that, I'd fail. Same with alcohol. Consuming it or not is a choice.
(I also think she can probably learn to eat chocolates in moderation, but if she's not there yet, that's understandable.)
The equation of being IR and being addicted is honestly ridiculous and bringing this thread off topic.
And no, I find chocolates tempting too and want to overeat them sometimes. That's not, IMO, at all like addiction, but if you want to think it is, cool, whatever. The point, again, is that that doesn't make me (or anyone else) unable to deal with a gift of chocolates without eating them all, any more than I would drink a bottle of wine and say I couldn't help it if/when gifted with such.
I respect your viewpoints and agree with many of them. OP ate 15 chocolates and didn't want to. End of story.
That has nothing to do with whatever point you're trying to make.
If you have IR and there are chocolates in front of you, what allows you to not eat them?
I don't know what IR is? If chocolates are in a box sealed I don't care about them. But if I opened the box then I would have a couple. But then I'll graze on them little by little over time.
My deficit is too small to allow me to eat chocolate regularly. So I don't. If someone else owns the chocolate I can tell myself that they aren't mine and not care. If they are in the store I can say those are for someone else. But if hubby gives them to me as a gift and they are mine then I will eat them.
If I start eating them I get the familiar sugar rise, crash and cravings for more. If I don't then I'm not crashing and don't really experience any problems not having them. So I don't know if that is actually an addiction to sugar or just insulin spikes and drops?
I thought you were LCHF, why would you eat chocolates?
You also earlier yourself brought up the issue of insulin sensitivity. IR is insulin resistance. You seemed to imply for some reason that the OP ate 15 chocolates she didn't want because she was insulin resistant. You also seemed to think avoiding chocolate was easier for people who were insulin sensitive.
Since you don't know what IR is, are you not insulin resistant? If you're not, how do you know things are harder for them when they restrict?2 -
I feel your pain, OP. I'm still waiting for the day when my in-laws realise that confectionery is not an ideal gift for someone with bulimia nervosa.1
-
Pathmonkey wrote: »My ex husband used to do the same thing to me! (note his status is EX). He was overweight as well.....I just have to conclude he was sabotaging my efforts. Nip this in the bud now....it borders on cruelty.
1 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »KWlosingit wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »
Science disagrees with you.cerise_noir wrote: »
Drug addiction is not anywhere near the same as "sugar addiction". It irks me when the two are similarly compared.
No it doesn't don't be ridiculous. There is a big difference between being tempted by a food you like and a chemically addictive drug.
Comparing chocolate to heroine is insultingly naive. You know a lot of people who break open their child's piggy bank and hop in their car at 3am to drive to some sketch part of town and buy some Hershey bar only to be found later passed out in their vehicle still clutching the wrapper?
I've heard of people who tried to sell their kids or organs for drugs... Would you REALLY sell your kid for chocolate?
Well on some days I would give my kids away even without the chocolate!!KWlosingit wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »
Science disagrees with you.cerise_noir wrote: »
Drug addiction is not anywhere near the same as "sugar addiction". It irks me when the two are similarly compared.
No it doesn't don't be ridiculous. There is a big difference between being tempted by a food you like and a chemically addictive drug.
Comparing chocolate to heroine is insultingly naive. You know a lot of people who break open their child's piggy bank and hop in their car at 3am to drive to some sketch part of town and buy some Hershey bar only to be found later passed out in their vehicle still clutching the wrapper?
I've heard of people who tried to sell their kids or organs for drugs... Would you REALLY sell your kid for chocolate?
Well on some days I would give my kids away even without the chocolate!!
Chocolate is legal so you dont have to sell your kids. That's the issue. Do I believe people addicted to chocolate would "sell their kids" or risk their livelihood for it if it was illegal and hard to get/expensive? Yes, yes I do. Not me, personally, but some sick person would, yes.
There's no current evidence for addiction to chocolate in humans. You're basing your beliefs on rat studies, which don't translate to humans.
Human studies on sugar addiction haven't panned out at this point.
Here are some compilations.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
Here's a more recent take:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-016-1229-6
"Given the lack of evidence supporting it, we argue against a premature incorporation of sugar addiction into the scientific literature and public policy recommendations."4 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Since OP is no doubt long gone:Verity1111 wrote: »It really gets me when people say "have willpower". It is called an ADDICTION for a reason.
OP's post was not about addiction, it was about dieting. She likes chocolate and finds them hard to turn down. That's normal. It's not like being a heroin addict, that's ridiculous.
The answer, obviously, is communication. However, people suggesting that she should have been angry or resentful toward her husband and mother-in-law and that he was akin to someone bringing his wife who just got out of Betty Ford a bottle of her favorite wine and generally a bad, uncaring person are nuts.People who can avoid things with sure will power are not addicted to them.
Not true, actually. Someone who has had a problem with alcohol will be exposed to offers and gifts and ads and other situations that make alcohol look easy and tempting ALL the time. Saying no and exercising will power is essential. At first, is it sensible not to make it harder than it needs to be (say, not going to a wine tasting just to hang out), yes, obviously. Similarly (although I do not think it's the same thing), someone trying to avoid overdoing tempting foods might want to portion them out or avoid them for a while and not have them in the house, sure, absolutely. But the person will still get things like gifts or offers or the foods at work or social gatherings, and so has to learn to say no or eat them in moderation.
If I said I was "addicted" to sweets so cannot exercise will power, according to you that would mean that I was either doomed to be fat or had to teach my co-workers that we cannot have sweets on the premises and any sweet treats someone brings or we get as a gift from a vendor, etc., must be tossed immediately. That ridiculous and not feasible.
Just SMH.
Granted, not everyone has difficulties. You can't make blanket statements for all people just because your body is insulin sensitive or responds properly to sugar
In the same way that some people aren't sensitive to alcohol and some are, some are sensitive to sugar or other food sources and some aren't. If a person has a drinking problem, as in your illustration, then the spouse shouldn't buy a bunch of alcohol and hand the person a bottle to teach self restraint or encourage a shot a night until the bottle's gone.
People need to be able to deal with the cards they have been dealt with and their struggles need to be taken seriously.
If you actually reread my post, I said the same thing about chocolates and alcohol (although I think the comparison is ridiculous).
I think OP needs to tell her husband if she doesn't want food gifts (said that ages ago) and that it might make sense for her to keep chocolates out of the house for the time being. I also think that claiming she CANNOT handle temptation because ADDICTED is false -- I get tempted by chocolates at work all the time and if I couldn't figure out a way to deal with that, I'd fail. Same with alcohol. Consuming it or not is a choice.
(I also think she can probably learn to eat chocolates in moderation, but if she's not there yet, that's understandable.)
The equation of being IR and being addicted is honestly ridiculous and bringing this thread off topic.
And no, I find chocolates tempting too and want to overeat them sometimes. That's not, IMO, at all like addiction, but if you want to think it is, cool, whatever. The point, again, is that that doesn't make me (or anyone else) unable to deal with a gift of chocolates without eating them all, any more than I would drink a bottle of wine and say I couldn't help it if/when gifted with such.
I respect your viewpoints and agree with many of them. OP ate 15 chocolates and didn't want to. End of story.
That has nothing to do with whatever point you're trying to make.
If you have IR and there are chocolates in front of you, what allows you to not eat them?
I don't know what IR is? If chocolates are in a box sealed I don't care about them. But if I opened the box then I would have a couple. But then I'll graze on them little by little over time.
My deficit is too small to allow me to eat chocolate regularly. So I don't. If someone else owns the chocolate I can tell myself that they aren't mine and not care. If they are in the store I can say those are for someone else. But if hubby gives them to me as a gift and they are mine then I will eat them.
If I start eating them I get the familiar sugar rise, crash and cravings for more. If I don't then I'm not crashing and don't really experience any problems not having them. So I don't know if that is actually an addiction to sugar or just insulin spikes and drops?
I thought you were LCHF, why would you eat chocolates?
You also earlier yourself brought up the issue of insulin sensitivity. IR is insulin resistance. You seemed to imply for some reason that the OP ate 15 chocolates she didn't want because she was insulin resistant. You also seemed to think avoiding chocolate was easier for people who were insulin sensitive.
Since you don't know what IR is, are you not insulin resistant? If you're not, how do you know things are harder for them when they restrict?
I never said OP is insulin resistant. I know what insulin resistance is. I haven't used the abbreviation before, so I simply didn't pick up on yours . I've only been doing LCHF for 3 months. I've had plenty of years high carb.
I rarely eat chocolates nowadays (have in the past) but do love them. It isn't worth it to start that sugar cycle. I had a Reese's a few weeks ago-- just one cup but it was too sweet so I didn't eat the other one.
It is easier for me avoiding sugary things on LCHF. I've recently changed my diet but kept low carb for lunch and have a protein with small starch serving and veggies for dinner.0 -
-
True story - although until op comes on and says she has a particular problem I won't speculate....
Sober alcoholic family member was handed a rum and coke (his favorite drink) he took one taste and spit it out at a party. Addicted folks sometimes have the ability to turn away. Don't sell them short, I know after witnessing that I never will.1 -
Verity1111 wrote: »It really gets me when people say "have willpower". It is called an ADDICTION for a reason. People who can avoid things with sure will power are not addicted to them. An addict literally can NOT say no. I know this from personal experience. I can NOT say no to certain foods. Then I might cry after and feel awful, but I still couldn't say no. Hell, I might cry during. This is why they have rehab for drug addicts - because they need to be locked away from the drugs for a period of time so they can be used to living without it and THEN get the willpower. Science has shown that some foods can be the same way for certain people and our bodies can react as some people react to drugs. The abstinence comes BEFORE the willpower. It works the same with food addicts - this is why some people go to inpatient weight loss facilities. It does NOT mean she will fail long term. This just means that, for now, she needs the people around her to respect that she is dieting and try not to tempt her so she can get used to not having the addictions for a while before she is exposed to them again.
Also, OP, explain that you understand he was being sweet, but please stick to gifts that are not edible. Tell him that maybe he loves you the way you are, but you want to love yourself and feel healthier, so you need his support and understanding, but you do appreciate him thinking of you.
Huh? The original post is not about addiction. You are projecting your stuff big time.5 -
I mean YES historically speaking people have sold their kids for food. So..... lol.0
-
Love how OP hasn't even replied to anything in the thread yet lol2
-
DisruptedMatrix wrote: »I mean YES historically speaking people have sold their kids for food. So..... lol.
But that's when people were in poverty or starvation/famine. Food is a need to survive, they would have died if they hadn't sold their kids (which I don't support, by the way). Unless you need chocolate to survive, you can't compare the two.0 -
DisruptedMatrix wrote: »I mean YES historically speaking people have sold their kids for food. So..... lol.
But that's when people were in poverty or starvation/famine. Food is a need to survive, they would have died if they hadn't sold their kids (which I don't support, by the way). Unless you need chocolate to survive, you can't compare the two.
Ah I see, you ask a question, I answer that yes, what you asked does happen, and you argue semantics. No one needs to sell their kids because chocolate is legal and no one is going to accept payment for chocolate in exchange for children. Not to mention an addict would just steal the food. But you asked a question and I answered. Yes, yes indeed children have been sold for food.2 -
-
DisruptedMatrix wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »I mean YES historically speaking people have sold their kids for food. So..... lol.
But that's when people were in poverty or starvation/famine. Food is a need to survive, they would have died if they hadn't sold their kids (which I don't support, by the way). Unless you need chocolate to survive, you can't compare the two.
Ah I see, you ask a question, I answer that yes, what you asked does happen, and you argue semantics. No one needs to sell their kids because chocolate is legal and no one is going to accept payment for chocolate in exchange for children. Not to mention an addict would just steal the food. But you asked a question and I answered. Yes, yes indeed children have been sold for food.
I think you might have been arguing to someone else, because I never mentioned food in general, just chocolate. Bringing up food is a completely different topic, which yes, I agree would have happened in the past (maybe even currently in impoverished countries). However, I highly doubt anyone would sell their own kid for chocolate unless something's wrong with their head.1 -
Pathmonkey wrote: »My ex husband used to do the same thing to me! (note his status is EX). He was overweight as well.....I just have to conclude he was sabotaging my efforts. Nip this in the bud now....it borders on cruelty.
Here in this very forum is a thread where a woman - who has had to create a secret anonymous account just to post! - has been describing ACTUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL AND EMOTIONAL ABUSE and you are trying to say that because THIS OP's husband did something nice for his wife - it's only been two weeks, he probably forgot - that he's cruel?
Get some perspective!5 -
DisruptedMatrix wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »I mean YES historically speaking people have sold their kids for food. So..... lol.
But that's when people were in poverty or starvation/famine. Food is a need to survive, they would have died if they hadn't sold their kids (which I don't support, by the way). Unless you need chocolate to survive, you can't compare the two.
Ah I see, you ask a question, I answer that yes, what you asked does happen, and you argue semantics. No one needs to sell their kids because chocolate is legal and no one is going to accept payment for chocolate in exchange for children. Not to mention an addict would just steal the food. But you asked a question and I answered. Yes, yes indeed children have been sold for food.
I think you might have been arguing to someone else, because I never mentioned food in general, just chocolate. Bringing up food is a completely different topic, which yes, I agree would have happened in the past (maybe even currently in impoverished countries). However, I highly doubt anyone would sell their own kid for chocolate unless something's wrong with their head.
Then how was the point you were making relevant?0 -
Pathmonkey wrote: »My ex husband used to do the same thing to me! (note his status is EX). He was overweight as well.....I just have to conclude he was sabotaging my efforts. Nip this in the bud now....it borders on cruelty.
Here in this very forum is a thread where a woman - who has had to create a secret anonymous account just to post! - has been describing ACTUAL PSYCHOLOGICAL AND EMOTIONAL ABUSE and you are trying to say that because THIS OP's husband did something nice for his wife - it's only been two weeks, he probably forgot - that he's cruel?
Get some perspective!
wat0 -
DisruptedMatrix wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »DisruptedMatrix wrote: »I mean YES historically speaking people have sold their kids for food. So..... lol.
But that's when people were in poverty or starvation/famine. Food is a need to survive, they would have died if they hadn't sold their kids (which I don't support, by the way). Unless you need chocolate to survive, you can't compare the two.
Ah I see, you ask a question, I answer that yes, what you asked does happen, and you argue semantics. No one needs to sell their kids because chocolate is legal and no one is going to accept payment for chocolate in exchange for children. Not to mention an addict would just steal the food. But you asked a question and I answered. Yes, yes indeed children have been sold for food.
I think you might have been arguing to someone else, because I never mentioned food in general, just chocolate. Bringing up food is a completely different topic, which yes, I agree would have happened in the past (maybe even currently in impoverished countries). However, I highly doubt anyone would sell their own kid for chocolate unless something's wrong with their head.
Then how was the point you were making relevant?
You mean the point where I said people wouldn't sell their children for a chocolate addiction, but would for a heroin addiction?
It was in reference to a post that compared chocolate addiction and a heroin addiction, and how it's impossible to compare them because a chocolate addiction is really minor compared to a heroin addiction. If we were comparing a food "addiction" to a heroin addiction, that would have been different. Mainly because food isn't an addiction, it's a necessity, but that wasn't the argument people were having when I made the reference.1 -
DisruptedMatrix wrote: »I mean YES historically speaking people have sold their kids for food. So..... lol.
You know how that comment comes across right? You know this is happening now in parts of the world
Rather ironic considering your other posts
5 -
tell him for some people, 'complete abstinence is better then perfect moderation' (at least in beginning)
0 -
-
1
-
-
2 -
1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions