Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

I don't support the fat acceptance/plus size movement.

13567…13

Replies

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    xmichaelyx wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    SimplyAdia wrote: »
    Worry about yourself. Problem solved.

    Unfortunately in the US where government pays over half the cost of healthcare it's all taxpayers problem..

    You know this is true in every major Western country, right? And that we pay far more than any of them because we don't have single payer?

    Understand. With our system, the government is likely paying a smaller % of healthcare costs than most other western countries with some form of single payer.

    Personally don't think single payer fixes all the problems. We, by law, can't negotiate prices for drugs for Medicare, our malpractice laws are "interesting", we have state insurance law, instead of national, etc, etc. We have to look at all the cost/process differences between the US and benchmark countries to determine the most effective health delivery system from a clinical results and cost standpoint. Oh and pass appropriate legislation through the political process.
  • purebredpolly
    purebredpolly Posts: 318 Member
    edited May 2017
    heiliskrimsli wrote: »
    purebredpolly wrote: »
    Guess what? I went to the doctor today to review my blood workup, turns out them adjusting my thyroid meds for my Grave disease, coupled with the onset of menopause has made it impossible for my weight to budge despite following a strict diet for over a year. I eat really healthy, my LDL is 114. My blood sugar is a 6.6. My blood pressure was 117/76. But I am 212 pounds by his scale today. He said there are a few medications that might help me shed a few pounds, but the side effects could be devastating to my health, and he would not recommend me taking them. Turns out my risk factors are higher using this medication, and being at a lower weight, than me remaining the same weight I am now, and continuing to eat a healthy diet.

    So what does that mean? That means I better get on board with fat acceptance, and learn how to love myself at this size, and continue to take care of myself as I have been.

    Sometimes I think it's important to think before one speaks about such things. You don't agree with fat acceptance for yourself, well and fine by me, don't be fat then. But don't be putting it off on other folks. You don't know what a person's story is, or why they are fat, and running that anti fat acceptance speech is very unhelpful to folks like me just trying to make it through the day by eating healthy, and keeping the calories down so the scale does not go higher. Think before you speak why don't you!

    You're telling me that even if you eat at a deficit it's impossible for you to lose weight?

    I'm telling you that you are not the exception to the laws of physics.

    I feel so sorry for you being so ignorant of medical conditions, including those chemically induced to lower one's metabolism to prevent the thyroid from causing the heart to beat until it explodes. Which is exactly what the doctor had to do as I nearly died from my heart beating too fast. I've been diagnosed with stage 3 congestive heart failure, with uncontrolled a-fib that must be kept under control. They lower my metabolism to a snail's pace. You are ignorant, and it's ignorant people like you that make nice folks like me to lose patience and speak rudely. You have no idea what you are talking about, and need to stop thinking you know it all. I am 1 stage away from getting on the list for a heart transplant. Think before you speak!
  • Macy9336
    Macy9336 Posts: 694 Member
    heiliskrimsli wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    moya_bleh wrote: »
    I support every human's right to feel comfortable in their own skin regardless of weight, height, race, faith, gender, sexual orientation, health, disability, eye colour, hair colour, teeth straightness, favourite sports team etc.

    I don't support the fat acceptance movement - and the same rhetoric espoused by the fat acceptance movement has also crept into the body positivity movement - because it has turned into a cause filled with hypocrisy, entitlement and promotes an unhealthy lifestyle, often resorting to naming SCIENTIFIC FACT as 'fatphobia.' (see post above regarding Ragen Chastain telling a girl to ignore her doctor in the face of blindness)


    The hypocrisy of the FA movement is what gets me.

    Fat Acceptance/Body Positivity advocates will claim "My food intake has no bearing on my weight" while telling women under 200lbs to "eat a cheeseburger."

    FA/BP advocates will claim that "You're not a doctor, you can't make assumptions on my health based on my weight" while instantly diagnosing any woman under 200lbs with anorexia nervosa. Not only can they make a 100% accurate assumption on their health based on a photo, they can also judge their mental state, too. A FA/BP advocate posts a stream of selfies describing themselves as a "perfect, fierce, beautiful warrior Goddess" - perfectly fine. A slimmer woman posts a pic and she's "vain/shallow/stuck-up/conceited/attention seeking."

    FA/BP claim that fatphobia is lurking in every corner, but it's perfectly OK to call somebody a "skinny b*tch/twig/anorexic/body of a 12 year-old boy." Tearing others down to make yourself feel better? Really? If it's health at every size, then shouldn't that include people.....you know, of EVERY size?


    Posting all kinds of memes about "Real men" who will love every inch. All of said memes contain an overweight woman with a slimmer man. Dare to ask why they wouldn't date a man equally as overweight as they are and without a hint of irony, the reply will be "We shouldn't have to lower our standards." Do you what? They are right. Everybody IS entitled to their preferences, but when those preferences include a REQUIREMENT for people to bring qualities to the table that you yourself have no intention of displaying then it becomes unrealistic and reeks of entitlement. Again, the notion of "We deserve fit partners, but people as fat as me? They can go jump off a cliff onto a bed of spikes" highlights the hypocrisy of the fat acceptance/body positivity movement.




    I totally agree with you. My teen daughter is naturally very slim. She is constantly bombarded with nasty messages, especially the body of a twelve year old boy thing. She thinks her shoulders are bony and disgusting...hello shoulders are meant to be sculpted and are naturally going to be a bit bony because fat doesn't gather there unless you are overweight. But she's constantly being told by the FA militants that she's too skinny and therefore will never find a man who find her attractive. It's really damaging to young women and no different imho than espousing a size 00, heroin chic look. Both are unhealthy extremes. I wish that fashion and media would just show healthy BMI bodies....athletic and no athletic because healthy range is what is most attractive and what girls should aspire to.

    Size 00 and smaller now exist in part because while the size numbers have not changed, the actual size of the garments has. What was a size 8 in 1958 - when it was the smallest size made at a 23.5" waist and 31" bust - is smaller than a size 00 from 2011 with at 25" waist and 31" bust.
    The size inflation, known as vanity sizing, means the size number gets smaller, but the actual physical size of the clothing gets larger over time, but people just see the size number decreasing and are fooled into thinking this is now smaller.

    It's not. Vanity sizing is now getting worse.

    Completely agree on the vanity sizing. Case in point, in 2001, eight weeks after my first pregnancy/birth I went to buy new suits for my return to work. I was elated to find I was a size SMALLER than my prepregnancy size ( size 4 vs. size 6 US). Then I thought about it because I knew I had some excess skin...no amount of exercise can remove skin,,.so it was impossible for my waist to be smaller after having just had a baby. Yep..I'd been vanity sized down when I really had only shrunk down to slightly larger than my prepregancy waist size. The vanity sizing has kept getting worse...I've gone down another size to a size 2 and had another baby since then. I weigh the same now as I did prepregancy but I know for a fact my tummy area/waist is a little larger because there is a little bit of excess skin that wasn't there before. You can't see it when I stand up...but if I bend over...there's a little pooch. So today's size 2 is at least the size 6 of the 1990s based on my personal experience. You can see that the sizes have increased if you buy vintage clothes big time!
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    heiliskrimsli wrote: »
    Macy9336 wrote: »
    moya_bleh wrote: »
    I support every human's right to feel comfortable in their own skin regardless of weight, height, race, faith, gender, sexual orientation, health, disability, eye colour, hair colour, teeth straightness, favourite sports team etc.

    I don't support the fat acceptance movement - and the same rhetoric espoused by the fat acceptance movement has also crept into the body positivity movement - because it has turned into a cause filled with hypocrisy, entitlement and promotes an unhealthy lifestyle, often resorting to naming SCIENTIFIC FACT as 'fatphobia.' (see post above regarding Ragen Chastain telling a girl to ignore her doctor in the face of blindness)


    The hypocrisy of the FA movement is what gets me.

    Fat Acceptance/Body Positivity advocates will claim "My food intake has no bearing on my weight" while telling women under 200lbs to "eat a cheeseburger."

    FA/BP advocates will claim that "You're not a doctor, you can't make assumptions on my health based on my weight" while instantly diagnosing any woman under 200lbs with anorexia nervosa. Not only can they make a 100% accurate assumption on their health based on a photo, they can also judge their mental state, too. A FA/BP advocate posts a stream of selfies describing themselves as a "perfect, fierce, beautiful warrior Goddess" - perfectly fine. A slimmer woman posts a pic and she's "vain/shallow/stuck-up/conceited/attention seeking."

    FA/BP claim that fatphobia is lurking in every corner, but it's perfectly OK to call somebody a "skinny b*tch/twig/anorexic/body of a 12 year-old boy." Tearing others down to make yourself feel better? Really? If it's health at every size, then shouldn't that include people.....you know, of EVERY size?


    Posting all kinds of memes about "Real men" who will love every inch. All of said memes contain an overweight woman with a slimmer man. Dare to ask why they wouldn't date a man equally as overweight as they are and without a hint of irony, the reply will be "We shouldn't have to lower our standards." Do you what? They are right. Everybody IS entitled to their preferences, but when those preferences include a REQUIREMENT for people to bring qualities to the table that you yourself have no intention of displaying then it becomes unrealistic and reeks of entitlement. Again, the notion of "We deserve fit partners, but people as fat as me? They can go jump off a cliff onto a bed of spikes" highlights the hypocrisy of the fat acceptance/body positivity movement.




    I totally agree with you. My teen daughter is naturally very slim. She is constantly bombarded with nasty messages, especially the body of a twelve year old boy thing. She thinks her shoulders are bony and disgusting...hello shoulders are meant to be sculpted and are naturally going to be a bit bony because fat doesn't gather there unless you are overweight. But she's constantly being told by the FA militants that she's too skinny and therefore will never find a man who find her attractive. It's really damaging to young women and no different imho than espousing a size 00, heroin chic look. Both are unhealthy extremes. I wish that fashion and media would just show healthy BMI bodies....athletic and no athletic because healthy range is what is most attractive and what girls should aspire to.

    Size 00 and smaller now exist in part because while the size numbers have not changed, the actual size of the garments has. What was a size 8 in 1958 - when it was the smallest size made at a 23.5" waist and 31" bust - is smaller than a size 00 from 2011 with at 25" waist and 31" bust.
    The size inflation, known as vanity sizing, means the size number gets smaller, but the actual physical size of the clothing gets larger over time, but people just see the size number decreasing and are fooled into thinking this is now smaller.

    It's not. Vanity sizing is now getting worse.

    Vanity sizing is out of control, at least in the places I shop. I am a 00 when I buy new clothes. When I buy or try on vintage clothing, I'm a medium or a small.
  • moya_bleh
    moya_bleh Posts: 1,375 Member
    WakkoW wrote: »
    Geocitiesuser wrote: »
    There are few things in this world that I hate, despite, and resent, more than the "HAES" / "Fat acceptance" movement. Absolutely infuriates me to unhealthy levels, for a list of reasons too long to list.

    Agreed.

    I wrote in another fat acceptance thread about how I was a 1970's fat kid and bullied because of it. If it had been around, my stupid, younger self would have probably would have embraced the HAES movement whole-heatedly. I am so happy I didn't have a bunch of crabs pulling me down telling lies about how great being fat is.

    Crabs in a bucket mentality. Summed up perfectly.
  • extra_medium
    extra_medium Posts: 1,525 Member
    Juniper3411 wrote: »
    xmichaelyx wrote: »
    ErinMichelle31 wrote: »
    The body positivity movement isn't about promoting being heavy, it's about teaching women to love themselves, and rejecting impossible body standards.

    Unless you're handicapped, there's no such thing as "impossible body standards." At its core, HAES is about giving up and accepting the status quo.



    The only problem I have with your statement is that there are certain body standards that aren't possible. I will never have long super thin legs. Obviously I can't lengthen my legs without some seriously painful surgery :) , and the other because of straight up genetics. I'm 5'4" and I have been as low as 120 pounds. Up top I look practically emaciated while my lower half looks normal. If I went to the lowest end of my weight range I would still carry more of my weight in my lower half, those are the breaks, I literally can't change that. People have different builds when they are in their healthy weight range, I'm an hourglass personally. So I guess I would just like that clarified that if you are somewhere in your healthy weight range that certain beauty aesthetics may still be out of reach forever.

    The good news is that most of those "standards" are hardly standard or universal. The only real standard is that most people usually want to look differently than they currently do. So the person with skinny legs wants an hourglass figure and vice versa.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories