What terms/phrases wind you up about losing weight?
Replies
-
LovesDogsAndBooks wrote: »LovesDogsAndBooks wrote: »English is not my first language, so I don't get what's wrong with talking about "muscle tone" or "being toned"? Just had a quick glance at Wikipedia, and the word seems related to muscle.
It is. Atonic literally means 'lacking muscular tone.' So tone is technically fine to say.
However, when someone says they want to 'tone up' I still always picture this:
Thanks! Maybe there are certain negative connotations that you only have as a native speaker. But there have been a couple of people here in this thread that are bothered by someone saying muscle tone or getting toned. Then they seem to be wrong, not the people who say that.
Muscle tone is a real thing that relates to how muscles respond to pressure. It has *nothing* to do with what people actually mean when they say they want to "tone up". When people say they want to "tone up", it means they want to look thinner/leaner/firmer. Which means they want to lose fat. (They may think that they want to "lengthen" their muscles, but that's impossible without surgery. And completely unrelated to muscle tone.)
e.g. Many women will claim they want to do yoga or pilates to "tone up". Yoga is a wonderful activity, but people with a lot of muscle tone have their muscles resist pressure/stress enough that they tend to be bad at yoga because they're not flexible enough. So, doing yoga to improve muscle tone (using the real definition) would be counterproductive. Instead, do it to improve strength and flexibility.
Basically, marketing forces in the fitness industry decided it would be a good idea to steal a word that actually relates to muscles and completely redefine it while spewing out a bunch of misinformation to sell their product. And, in some circles, the new definition stuck.10 -
Things like "per say" and "walla" really set my teeth on edge, but that's not only generic, but also elitist of me, so I never mention it.
("Walla" in constructs like "I started weighing food and - walla! - I finally started losing weight.)
So glad you clarified. I was worried that my first middle name was problematic somehow.
18 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »LovesDogsAndBooks wrote: »LovesDogsAndBooks wrote: »English is not my first language, so I don't get what's wrong with talking about "muscle tone" or "being toned"? Just had a quick glance at Wikipedia, and the word seems related to muscle.
It is. Atonic literally means 'lacking muscular tone.' So tone is technically fine to say.
However, when someone says they want to 'tone up' I still always picture this:
Thanks! Maybe there are certain negative connotations that you only have as a native speaker. But there have been a couple of people here in this thread that are bothered by someone saying muscle tone or getting toned. Then they seem to be wrong, not the people who say that.
Muscle tone is a real thing that relates to how muscles respond to pressure. It has *nothing* to do with what people actually mean when they say they want to "tone up". When people say they want to "tone up", it means they want to look thinner/leaner/firmer. Which means they want to lose fat. (They may think that they want to "lengthen" their muscles, but that's impossible without surgery. And completely unrelated to muscle tone.)
e.g. Many women will claim they want to do yoga or pilates to "tone up". Yoga is a wonderful activity, but people with a lot of muscle tone have their muscles resist pressure/stress enough that they tend to be bad at yoga because they're not flexible enough. So, doing yoga to improve muscle tone (using the real definition) would be counterproductive. Instead, do it to improve strength and flexibility.
Basically, marketing forces in the fitness industry decided it would be a good idea to steal a word that actually relates to muscles and completely redefine it while spewing out a bunch of misinformation to sell their product. And, in some circles, the new definition stuck.
Thanks for that explanation!0 -
Ok. I have a new one: white bean extract.1
-
Heather4448 wrote: »If u type lik dis on da forums... I want to strangle you and/or beat you to death.
@Morgaen73 Loose/lose! Ugh! I absolutely give a pass to ESL folks for that, but when your bio says you're from Indiana... All I can think is, "How do you not know this?!"
@Heather4448 lol I get what you are saying. Luckely I'm not from Indiana :P We have 11 official languages.1 -
dale050467 wrote: »using loose instead of lose
English speaking grammer Nazis who seem to assume that everyone who communicates in English speaks English as a first language and must therefore be perfect at it.
I corrected my mistake Herr Generaloberst.
Huh. Loose and lose. See the thing is they are two different words with two different meanings. It's nothing to do with grammar Nazism - because it isn't grammar. The opposite of loose is tight, the opposite of lose is gain. You might as well say " I want to apricot weight" because it makes as much sense.
I bolded your statement because I fail to understand why you took offence to learning something new - if English is indeed a second language for you then you now know the difference and can use either word correctly in the future. "Ich bien ein berliner" if you see what I mean?
I took offense to the need of someone to sarcastically point out something that is obviousely a simple spelling mistake. There was absolutely no lesson in that post. Also, I said English was my second language and implied that I may therefore make more mistakes than people who speak English as a first language. I did not say I was an idiot.
Once again thanks for the arrogance.9 -
Katiebear_81 wrote: »....made me feel stabby
Now this phrase --- I love it!!
Katiebear_81 wrote: ».....when my BF told me that I shouldn't lift heavy weights because I will become bulky, and then proceeded to tell me that I should lift smaller weights more. When I explained to him that I don't have the correct genes to get hella bulky on my own, he continued to insist that I should work out like Jackie Chan because he's so "toned" and who doesn't want to be "toned"?
The funeral was beautiful, and he will be sorely missed.
I got a good chuckle.
1 -
"It's not a diet it's a lifestyle change"
I wonder if in a few years people will be saying "no dessert for me, I'm lifestyling"
Any mention of "good food", "bad food", "clean food" or the such - what did your pizza beat you up? Did you scrub your banana in soapy water?
"Paleo", "meal replacement shake" (it's just a shake) or "a calorie is a calorie".
Hearing anyone claim that their diet/exercise regime is superior to all others, or claiming that their way is the only way, or the healthiest way, or that they are better than anyone else because they do things a certain way.4 -
"cardio is pointless, just eat less" - bodybuilder bros are notorious for this one
I'd rather do some extra cardio - with all its benefits, and be able to eat like an actual normal human being than starve myself on sub 1600 calories just to create a deficit thanks.12 -
LadyLilion wrote: »Tone/toned - What other word would you used for a person wanting to not be saggy-baggy? I suppose there's "firm" but why is that somehow less annoying than "tone"?
I want to be toned, firm, and/or built like a brick shithouse.
5 -
LadyLilion wrote: »Tone/toned - What other word would you used for a person wanting to not be saggy-baggy? I suppose there's "firm" but why is that somehow less annoying than "tone"?
I want to be toned, firm, and/or built like a brick shithouse.
Quick detour.
Some phrases just takes me back to my childhood.
I was the brick shithouse to my 2 petite sisters.
We also had one. Hell using it in winter.
Cheers, h.
14 -
middlehaitch wrote: »LadyLilion wrote: »Tone/toned - What other word would you used for a person wanting to not be saggy-baggy? I suppose there's "firm" but why is that somehow less annoying than "tone"?
I want to be toned, firm, and/or built like a brick shithouse.
Quick detour.
Some phrases just takes me back to my childhood.
I was the brick shithouse to my 2 petite sisters.
We also had one. Hell using it in winter.
Cheers, h.
haha....awesome!
2 -
We may understand what they think they meant, but the general public clearly does not.It drives me nuts when people correct someone for saying "muscle weighs more than fat", nitpicking semantics... we understood what they meant.
Watch the shocked look on the average person's face when you show them a specific volume of fat and muscle (such as from beef or pork) and then try to guess which weighs more.
The average person cannot correctly answer me when I ask which would hit the ground first if you dropped a bowling ball, a banana, a golf ball and a baseball off of a second story building.
That is, not without a Google search first...
Start educating people to use words properly and they might learn something.
Ignorance of proper diet and exercise requirements are only part of the reason most people are overweight but it is one of the easiest things to correct.
Developing the discipline to do what is necessary for improving one's diet and "fitness" is much harder.
Setting expectations for weight loss, body image, etc. based on facts instead of what they "think" is true and ultimately "want" to be true can go a long way towards preventing early disappointment and disillusionment.
You are my favourite MFPer for the day, because the bolded is almost exactly the example I use when someone asks me to trust the general public's "common sense".2 -
In future I will simply say "Due to the difference in density, the volume of muscle required to achieve a specific weight is much less than the volume of fat required to achieve the same weight and therefore when your body loses volume while retaining it's weight it is likely that your muscle volume has increased proportionality in relation to a decrease in fat volume".
I think the general public will get that.12 -
I suppose it isn't exclusive to weight loss but goes hand in hand - detoxing and misuse of the word "natural" drives me nuts.3
-
Yeah, I don't think that people understand the phrase incorrectly, they just use it incorrectly for context. When people say "muscle weighs more than fat" they generally mean that you can look smaller at the same or a higher weight (have a lower body fat percentage), which is true. Now, it's usually used as a reply to something like "I have been dieting and exercising for a whole week, but I have gained a pound". The reply would be "Maybe you lost fat and gained muscle because muscle weighs more than fat" which is not true.5
-
"I'm on a diet"
"You can't eat that, you're on a diet"
:sick:3 -
"Starvation mode"
Also when people claim cardio is bad for aesthetics so you should be doing weight lifting instead.4 -
In future I will simply say "Due to the difference in density, the volume of muscle required to achieve a specific weight is much less than the volume of fat required to achieve the same weight and therefore when your body loses volume while retaining it's weight it is likely that your muscle volume has increased proportionality in relation to a decrease in fat volume".
I think the general public will get that.
Yes!!!!
This whole post and comments is like first graders making fun of the kindergarteners.
7 -
Gains *eye roll*5
-
2 more: when people use absolutes because they lost 20 lbs and they are now a weight loss expert. "You need to eat more." "You're eating too much carbs." "That's not sustainable." As if they KNOW.
Also, I know a few people who think their weight is effected by silly things. Like if they drink a glass of water before bed, they lose weight. Or if they eat a pickle with lunch, they always gain weight.1 -
"Eat clean", and pretty much nothing else. The signaling of virtue with food choices does not impress me as particularly virtuous.8
-
"There is a lot of research that shows" or "there are studies that show" when links to or titles of said research/studies are not provided.
It remains a mild irritation until someone claims that the woo they're spouting can significantly improve a major life condition. That's what gets me het up.4 -
Little bit of a tangent....but when someone starts a thread title with something totally generic. Like, "Losing Weight", or "Low Carb" or anything that has zero hint about what's in the post.
Don't know why, but it annoys me. Too bad I can't (at least completely) choose what to be annoyed by....10 -
In short? Yes.Alatariel75 wrote: »I don't get why people get so butthurt when someone corrects loose to lose. Are we so delicate as a society that is better to be allowed to be wrong than be corrected and learn? I'd rather learn of a misspelling on MFP than after i put the wrong word in a presentation at work....
There have been several books on the subject since the 60's.
"Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" & "The Age of American Unreason" in particular.
Other titles that I have not read don't come to mind right now.
Simply put, it has become not only "politically correct" and socially accepted to be ignorant (and/or outright stupid) in this country, but we have turned into a culture where ignorance is actually considered to be almost a virtue.
The trends were there early on for researchers to spot.
Robert A. Heinlein alluded to the direction we were headed in the book "Starship Troopers"* which he wrote in December 1959.
He even writes {in 1959} about how there would metal detectors in schools at the end of the 20th century, how sociologists would be influencing culture / government policy, etc. Nailed it.
Interesting and enlightening -if depressing- reads.
* The crappy MOVIE version of "Starship Troopers" is NOT the book. The director of the movie (Paul Verhoeven) deliberately twisted the book to fit a political agenda or something. He turned the good guys into Neo-Nazis, for instance.
The only adaption of a book that I have seen that is worse is the butchery they performed on "The Golden Compass" (aka "Northern Lights" in the UK)
14 -
"Clean eating." UGH.1
-
Yay!! This is almost like having friends!HeliumIsNoble wrote: »You are my favourite MFPer for the day, because the bolded is almost exactly the example I use when someone asks me to trust the general public's "common sense".
{I would imagine...}
6 -
kommodevaran wrote: »
IF is confusion, and the confusion is mythical. IF just not eating all the time, which can be good for adherance for those who prefer it. But lots of people are already not eating all the time, and thriving, without calling it IF. IF is sourrounded with ideas that you burn more fat by not eating, that it makes you live longer, that it is "skipping breakfast", but just skipping breakfast won't have the same effect (you have to call it IF), that certain foods and drinks magically breaks your fast, or not, and that it has any special meaning, which it has not, and that you have to eat a certain number of meals, which you don't.Ironandwine69 wrote: »kommodevaran wrote: »Way too many. Trying to lose weight (and loose weight, even), intermittent fasting. Not so much journeys, as tracks, horses and wagons (even bandwagons). The last X pounds, healthy food is expensive, healthy recipes, cheating, confusing CICO with calorie counting, motivation, willpower, foods to make you feel full, healthy snacks. I'm not full of hate, but I'm bitter and enthusiastic - because believing in these kinds of myths and confusion made it impossible for me to reach my goals, and exposing them to daylight made it virtually effortless. I don't want others to go through the same as me, but I can't do anything to stop a person who has made up their mind, and that makes me frustrated. I usually burn out after a few years, so I hope I some day can just roll my eyes
How is IF a myth?
I don't believe any of those things you say about IF, except maybe that you might live longer, but it's completely unfair to describe IF as a myth, just because some myths may have grown up around it. I say "may" because, to be honest, your post is the first time I've ever heard about half of those myths. IF works for weight loss because all you have to remember is to eat no more than a single light meal, 2 days a week. It is easy to understand and stick to. And despite you labelling it as a myth, there is evidence that it has beneficial effects on the body's workings that go beyond weight loss, which makes it seem likely that it could increase longevity.
I ditched it when I started exercising daily, as I hated exercising fasted knowing that I couldn't refuel afterwards. But it works, and has a growing body of evidence to support it. It is not a myth.1 -
lilolilo920 wrote: »"Toning"
"Muscle weighs more than fat"
Ugh just thinking about this makes me angry.
People who deny that muscle weights more than fat really get my goat. OK, let's go for a run, you carry a gallon of muscle and I'll carry a gallon of fat. Let's see which one of us drops first!
I'm not denying that it is often said in a way that is unhelpful or that demonstrates ignorance, but it is a scientific fact.3 -
Yay!! This is almost like having friends!HeliumIsNoble wrote: »You are my favourite MFPer for the day, because the bolded is almost exactly the example I use when someone asks me to trust the general public's "common sense".
{I would imagine...}
Maybe someday you'll have a few 2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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