Why is this even remotely controversial?

PikaKnight

To note again from the 1st thread -

She does include strength training in her workout routine. For those without access to a gym, you can still accomplish this with bodyweight exercises or some investment in dumbbells with plates (or even TRX Suspension or sandbags).

Her lean/ripped looked is mostly due to the lower body fat %...not because she spends tons of money on equipment or a gym membership.

yoovie

Sorry, but, though some men today are better than their fathers probably were about this, the research overwhelmingly says that women are STIIIIIIIIILL having to run things at home. Some estimates have it at ~80% of the domestic labour (when, both partners are working).

I do the vast majority of the housework in my home. Not because my SO is unable or unwilling to do it, but because I'm a it of a control freak and also like things a little neater than he does. He's content to run the vacuum once a week while I like to do it three or four times a week.

I wash dishes by hand every night and do 90% of the laundry. Yet, I find time to lounge in front of the TV, exercise, write and read along with a full-time job and a pretty active social life.

If women are doing 80% of the housework in their homes and they aren't happy about it, they need to discuss it with their SOs and change it. It really i sthat simple.

Don't make yourself a martyr and then ask for my sympathy.

LOL ok I'm also single at the moment, as it happens. This is not about me personally, at all. (and I'm no martyr btw)

One reason you might be a control freak about it, is you've been socialized to clean -- to notice dust, etc; to know what to do with it; to feel uncomfortable in its presence, maybe worry how others might judge you if they saw it... Many, many women have been raised this way; many, many men have not. The discrepancy doesn't stop in one generation, I'm afraid.

You clearly never set foot in my house growing up. My mother is the exact opposite. I grew up in chaos. Her best friend and her daughter (who is my best friend) and my father's sister whom I'm very close to and lived with for a while all live in chaos. They are not dirty people, but they aren't NEAT people, either. My mother always says my neat-freakiness is me rebelling against her.

I'm a Capricorn. That's why I clean so much. I need order in my life, whether it's a clean house or decorations just right. I need a very specific environment to function on any level. It isn't society. It's who I am. When i move to a new place, my boxes are unpacked and everything put away within the first week because I just can't stand things being cluttered. And if I asked my SO to do more, he would without argument. But I can't even stand how he stacks dishes in the dishrack. He doesn't do it "right" (i.e. MY way).

But thank you for the psycho-analysis of someone you don't know anything about. :flowerforyou:

i didn't psychoanalyze you, i said "one reason you MIGHT". because you are 1) a woman who 2) grew up in a society that does this to women, *generally*. that is sociological.

whether or not you grew up in a society that does this to women (re: cleanliness obligations) depends on how old you are, what country you were raised in, what generation your mother was part of, if you had both parents or just one and whether you had a stay at home mom or dad or if they both worked.

your sociology stuff is backdated and cant be handed out like that anymore.

We have unlimited options now and nothing is traditional or standard anymore. You cant make sweeping generalizations across the female half of the species.

You can tell us all about you and your situation and no one can say boo in disagreement. but what things were like for you were probably not the same way for women across the board anymore :flowerforyou:

it's not backdated actually, some of these studies are from the past five years, in north america, with women who were reproductive aged in that time frame. i know everyone would like for this crap to be over but it's not


The Persistence of the Gendered Division of Domestic Labour

Why has the gendered division of domestic labour proved so resistant to change despite the growth in married women’s labour force participation? We develop a game theoretic model of marriage to show that women’s individual levels of relative economic autonomy are not in themselves sufficient to bring about an aggregate shift in the division of domestic labour. Using data for 22 countries from the 1994 International Social Survey Programme, we show that what is required is that there be a greater proportion of economically autonomous women within the society as a whole, together with a sufficiently large proportion of men who, if faced with an economically autonomous woman, would rather participate in domestic tasks than endure marital breakdown. These results suggest that until we see greater gender material equality for the majority of women in a society and an evolution in men’s gender ideology, the gendered division of domestic labour will persist.

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/1/43.abstract


Gender Convergence in Domestic Work: Discerning the Effects of Interactional and Institutional Barriers from Large-scale Data

Cross-national trends in paid and unpaid work time over the last 40 years reveal a slow and incomplete convergence of women’s and men’s work patterns. A simplistic extrapolation would indicate a 70—80 year process of gender convergence, with the year 2010 representing an approximate mid-point. However, in conformity with the expectations of gender theory, time use data show that gender segregation in domestic work is quite persistent over time. Women still do the bulk of routine housework and caring for family members while men have increased their contributions disproportionately to non-routine domestic work, suggesting that gender ideologies and the associated ‘doing’ of gender in interaction remain important features of the division of domestic labour. The effects of institutional barriers are also apparent, with differential changes in women’s proportional contribution to routine housework and caring activities related to different national policy clusters.

http://soc.sagepub.com/content/45/2/234.abstract

its also not the same. It may not be over - but we arent where we were in the beginning. we have made progress. i cant believe im still having to explain to women that not only have we indeed made progress, but that its okay to celebrate that. we dont have to end every freaking fudging sentence with a ....BUT WE'RE STILL ON THE SHT END OF THE STICK.

As individuals, we are not. As individuals, we are now free.

Free to exercise our butts off in tiny workout clothes in front of our kids and stand up to the naysayers and say oh yeah? what's your excuse for not being awesome, when we finally have the right to be.

I am awesome.

I am not a bully.

I don't call people names based on some wacky assumptions I've made up in my head about them.

no one called names.

whierd

That's awesome. Are you saying that means no other mother of three has any excuse for not doing the same? Even if they live elsewhere or work more hours or have more expenses or make less? Because otherwise, I don't see your point.

It costs $0 to get in shape. ZERO. DOLLARS.

Unless you consider that time is money, and the level of fitness depicted in the pic is not something that achieved without time.

They can always just stay fat. That is a valid option.

One doesn't have to be fat because one has limited time to workout.

i cant even - did yall see the flipflop - i cant i just cant. you win.

Woohoo!!! I wasn't aware there was a contest, but I love winning. Is there a prize?

But I didn't flip flop. We were dicussing fit and someone threw in fat. You don't have to be fat to be unfit.

We were discussing asthetics, not cardiovascular fitness.

I was discussing the money (and/or time) it takes to reach the level of fitness in the pic. But either way, being fat is separate issue.

She appears fit because of a low bodyfat percentage, so fat is relevant hete. And I said if you do not want to take the time to exercise to become fit (and appear fit as a result), then you could always just stay fat.

mustgetmuscles1

To note again from the 1st thread -

She does include strength training in her workout routine. For those without access to a gym, you can still accomplish this with bodyweight exercises or some investment in dumbbells with plates (or even TRX Suspension or sandbags).

Her lean/ripped looked is mostly due to the lower body fat %...not because she spends tons of money on equipment or a gym membership.

Shhhh Stop taking away their excuses. It is not polite.

rml_16

I think one of only a few valid reasons not to look like that woman (or achieve some level of fitness) is that you just don't want to or that there are other things you'd rather do. Even if those other things are sitting in front of the TV all day.

If you WANT to achieve that, most likely you can.

bcattoes

That's awesome. Are you saying that means no other mother of three has any excuse for not doing the same? Even if they live elsewhere or work more hours or have more expenses or make less? Because otherwise, I don't see your point.

It costs $0 to get in shape. ZERO. DOLLARS.

Unless you consider that time is money, and the level of fitness depicted in the pic is not something that achieved without time.

They can always just stay fat. That is a valid option.

One doesn't have to be fat because one has limited time to workout.

I'm sorry ... which side of this are you arguing?

Also, I'd like to point out that a lot of very poor people are quite fit because the less you make, the more likely it is you're doing some kind of manual labor.

I worked in a grocery store for two years as a cashier and in the bakery. I was on my feet all day, running around doing things and lifting heavy things all the time. Even eating some of the bakery products didn't cause any weight issues because I was moving all the time.

And my next job was in a place for juevmile delinquent girls. It wasn't unusual to have to literally westle them to the ground and hold them down until they were ready to behave themselves. And just going for meals was a lot of walking from their "cottages" to the cafeteria.

Neither job paid particularly well.

Now I make plenty of money and sit at a desk all day.

My "side" is that your personal example is not proof that every mother living in poverty has the opportunity to become fit. They don't necessarily have to be fat, but sometimes regular workouts simply is not possible. Some people have really hard lives.

niricava

All I can say is this whole "Excuses" marketing campaign did it's job. People are talking about fitness. And I think that's great. Maria is inspiring. All you MFP Success Stories are inspiring.

Following the pages of discussion on this topic reaffirms to me that I have been making excuses for not being as fit as I could be. AND...it's in MY control to change that. And when I'm done making my excuses for that, I will :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

rml_16

My "side" is that your personal example is not proof that every mother living in poverty has the opportunity to become fit. They don't necessarily have to be fat, but sometimes regular workouts simply is not possible. Some people have really hard lives.

I'm still waiting for an example. I asked for one a couple pages ago.

DamePiglet

Sorry, but, though some men today are better than their fathers probably were about this, the research overwhelmingly says that women are STIIIIIIIIILL having to run things at home. Some estimates have it at ~80% of the domestic labour (when, both partners are working).

I do the vast majority of the housework in my home. Not because my SO is unable or unwilling to do it, but because I'm a it of a control freak and also like things a little neater than he does. He's content to run the vacuum once a week while I like to do it three or four times a week.

I wash dishes by hand every night and do 90% of the laundry. Yet, I find time to lounge in front of the TV, exercise, write and read along with a full-time job and a pretty active social life.

If women are doing 80% of the housework in their homes and they aren't happy about it, they need to discuss it with their SOs and change it. It really i sthat simple.

Don't make yourself a martyr and then ask for my sympathy.

LOL ok I'm also single at the moment, as it happens. This is not about me personally, at all. (and I'm no martyr btw)

One reason you might be a control freak about it, is you've been socialized to clean -- to notice dust, etc; to know what to do with it; to feel uncomfortable in its presence, maybe worry how others might judge you if they saw it... Many, many women have been raised this way; many, many men have not. The discrepancy doesn't stop in one generation, I'm afraid.

You clearly never set foot in my house growing up. My mother is the exact opposite. I grew up in chaos. Her best friend and her daughter (who is my best friend) and my father's sister whom I'm very close to and lived with for a while all live in chaos. They are not dirty people, but they aren't NEAT people, either. My mother always says my neat-freakiness is me rebelling against her.

I'm a Capricorn. That's why I clean so much. I need order in my life, whether it's a clean house or decorations just right. I need a very specific environment to function on any level. It isn't society. It's who I am. When i move to a new place, my boxes are unpacked and everything put away within the first week because I just can't stand things being cluttered. And if I asked my SO to do more, he would without argument. But I can't even stand how he stacks dishes in the dishrack. He doesn't do it "right" (i.e. MY way).

But thank you for the psycho-analysis of someone you don't know anything about. :flowerforyou:

i didn't psychoanalyze you, i said "one reason you MIGHT". because you are 1) a woman who 2) grew up in a society that does this to women, *generally*. that is sociological.

whether or not you grew up in a society that does this to women (re: cleanliness obligations) depends on how old you are, what country you were raised in, what generation your mother was part of, if you had both parents or just one and whether you had a stay at home mom or dad or if they both worked.

your sociology stuff is backdated and cant be handed out like that anymore.

We have unlimited options now and nothing is traditional or standard anymore. You cant make sweeping generalizations across the female half of the species.

You can tell us all about you and your situation and no one can say boo in disagreement. but what things were like for you were probably not the same way for women across the board anymore :flowerforyou:

it's not backdated actually, some of these studies are from the past five years, in north america, with women who were reproductive aged in that time frame. i know everyone would like for this crap to be over but it's not


The Persistence of the Gendered Division of Domestic Labour

Why has the gendered division of domestic labour proved so resistant to change despite the growth in married women’s labour force participation? We develop a game theoretic model of marriage to show that women’s individual levels of relative economic autonomy are not in themselves sufficient to bring about an aggregate shift in the division of domestic labour. Using data for 22 countries from the 1994 International Social Survey Programme, we show that what is required is that there be a greater proportion of economically autonomous women within the society as a whole, together with a sufficiently large proportion of men who, if faced with an economically autonomous woman, would rather participate in domestic tasks than endure marital breakdown. These results suggest that until we see greater gender material equality for the majority of women in a society and an evolution in men’s gender ideology, the gendered division of domestic labour will persist.

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/1/43.abstract


Gender Convergence in Domestic Work: Discerning the Effects of Interactional and Institutional Barriers from Large-scale Data

Cross-national trends in paid and unpaid work time over the last 40 years reveal a slow and incomplete convergence of women’s and men’s work patterns. A simplistic extrapolation would indicate a 70—80 year process of gender convergence, with the year 2010 representing an approximate mid-point. However, in conformity with the expectations of gender theory, time use data show that gender segregation in domestic work is quite persistent over time. Women still do the bulk of routine housework and caring for family members while men have increased their contributions disproportionately to non-routine domestic work, suggesting that gender ideologies and the associated ‘doing’ of gender in interaction remain important features of the division of domestic labour. The effects of institutional barriers are also apparent, with differential changes in women’s proportional contribution to routine housework and caring activities related to different national policy clusters.

http://soc.sagepub.com/content/45/2/234.abstract

its also not the same. It may not be over - but we arent where we were in the beginning. we have made progress. i cant believe im still having to explain to women that not only have we indeed made progress, but that its okay to celebrate that. we dont have to end every freaking fudging sentence with a ....BUT WE'RE STILL ON THE SHT END OF THE STICK.

As individuals, we are not. As individuals, we are now free.

Free to exercise our butts off in tiny workout clothes in front of our kids and stand up to the naysayers and say oh yeah? what's your excuse for not being awesome, when we finally have the right to be.

I am awesome.

I am not a bully.

I don't call people names based on some wacky assumptions I've made up in my head about them.

no one called names.

You called me both mentally unstable and creepy.
Perhaps not exactly 'name calling', but close enough.
I wasn't that ugly about her, you or anyone in the forums. AT ALL.
Because I view a picture differently than others might, I have been accused of any number of personality disorders.
Simply uncalled for in an adult conversation.
Not much different than people saying nasty things about her parenting having never met her.

Which, might I remind you, I never did. My comments were limited to the photo in question.

bcattoes

That's awesome. Are you saying that means no other mother of three has any excuse for not doing the same? Even if they live elsewhere or work more hours or have more expenses or make less? Because otherwise, I don't see your point.

It costs $0 to get in shape. ZERO. DOLLARS.

Unless you consider that time is money, and the level of fitness depicted in the pic is not something that achieved without time.

They can always just stay fat. That is a valid option.

One doesn't have to be fat because one has limited time to workout.

i cant even - did yall see the flipflop - i cant i just cant. you win.

Woohoo!!! I wasn't aware there was a contest, but I love winning. Is there a prize?

But I didn't flip flop. We were dicussing fit and someone threw in fat. You don't have to be fat to be unfit.

We were discussing asthetics, not cardiovascular fitness.

I was discussing the money (and/or time) it takes to reach the level of fitness in the pic. But either way, being fat is separate issue.

She appears fit because of a low bodyfat percentage, so fat is relevant hete. And I said if you do not want to take the time to exercise to become fit (and appear fit as a result), then you could always just stay fat.

One could only stay fat if one was already fat. She appears fit because she is fit. If her BF% were several points higher she'd still appear fit.

rml_16

Sorry, but, though some men today are better than their fathers probably were about this, the research overwhelmingly says that women are STIIIIIIIIILL having to run things at home. Some estimates have it at ~80% of the domestic labour (when, both partners are working).

I do the vast majority of the housework in my home. Not because my SO is unable or unwilling to do it, but because I'm a it of a control freak and also like things a little neater than he does. He's content to run the vacuum once a week while I like to do it three or four times a week.

I wash dishes by hand every night and do 90% of the laundry. Yet, I find time to lounge in front of the TV, exercise, write and read along with a full-time job and a pretty active social life.

If women are doing 80% of the housework in their homes and they aren't happy about it, they need to discuss it with their SOs and change it. It really i sthat simple.

Don't make yourself a martyr and then ask for my sympathy.

LOL ok I'm also single at the moment, as it happens. This is not about me personally, at all. (and I'm no martyr btw)

One reason you might be a control freak about it, is you've been socialized to clean -- to notice dust, etc; to know what to do with it; to feel uncomfortable in its presence, maybe worry how others might judge you if they saw it... Many, many women have been raised this way; many, many men have not. The discrepancy doesn't stop in one generation, I'm afraid.

You clearly never set foot in my house growing up. My mother is the exact opposite. I grew up in chaos. Her best friend and her daughter (who is my best friend) and my father's sister whom I'm very close to and lived with for a while all live in chaos. They are not dirty people, but they aren't NEAT people, either. My mother always says my neat-freakiness is me rebelling against her.

I'm a Capricorn. That's why I clean so much. I need order in my life, whether it's a clean house or decorations just right. I need a very specific environment to function on any level. It isn't society. It's who I am. When i move to a new place, my boxes are unpacked and everything put away within the first week because I just can't stand things being cluttered. And if I asked my SO to do more, he would without argument. But I can't even stand how he stacks dishes in the dishrack. He doesn't do it "right" (i.e. MY way).

But thank you for the psycho-analysis of someone you don't know anything about. :flowerforyou:

i didn't psychoanalyze you, i said "one reason you MIGHT". because you are 1) a woman who 2) grew up in a society that does this to women, *generally*. that is sociological.

whether or not you grew up in a society that does this to women (re: cleanliness obligations) depends on how old you are, what country you were raised in, what generation your mother was part of, if you had both parents or just one and whether you had a stay at home mom or dad or if they both worked.

your sociology stuff is backdated and cant be handed out like that anymore.

We have unlimited options now and nothing is traditional or standard anymore. You cant make sweeping generalizations across the female half of the species.

You can tell us all about you and your situation and no one can say boo in disagreement. but what things were like for you were probably not the same way for women across the board anymore :flowerforyou:

it's not backdated actually, some of these studies are from the past five years, in north america, with women who were reproductive aged in that time frame. i know everyone would like for this crap to be over but it's not


The Persistence of the Gendered Division of Domestic Labour

Why has the gendered division of domestic labour proved so resistant to change despite the growth in married women’s labour force participation? We develop a game theoretic model of marriage to show that women’s individual levels of relative economic autonomy are not in themselves sufficient to bring about an aggregate shift in the division of domestic labour. Using data for 22 countries from the 1994 International Social Survey Programme, we show that what is required is that there be a greater proportion of economically autonomous women within the society as a whole, together with a sufficiently large proportion of men who, if faced with an economically autonomous woman, would rather participate in domestic tasks than endure marital breakdown. These results suggest that until we see greater gender material equality for the majority of women in a society and an evolution in men’s gender ideology, the gendered division of domestic labour will persist.

http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/1/43.abstract


Gender Convergence in Domestic Work: Discerning the Effects of Interactional and Institutional Barriers from Large-scale Data

Cross-national trends in paid and unpaid work time over the last 40 years reveal a slow and incomplete convergence of women’s and men’s work patterns. A simplistic extrapolation would indicate a 70—80 year process of gender convergence, with the year 2010 representing an approximate mid-point. However, in conformity with the expectations of gender theory, time use data show that gender segregation in domestic work is quite persistent over time. Women still do the bulk of routine housework and caring for family members while men have increased their contributions disproportionately to non-routine domestic work, suggesting that gender ideologies and the associated ‘doing’ of gender in interaction remain important features of the division of domestic labour. The effects of institutional barriers are also apparent, with differential changes in women’s proportional contribution to routine housework and caring activities related to different national policy clusters.

http://soc.sagepub.com/content/45/2/234.abstract

its also not the same. It may not be over - but we arent where we were in the beginning. we have made progress. i cant believe im still having to explain to women that not only have we indeed made progress, but that its okay to celebrate that. we dont have to end every freaking fudging sentence with a ....BUT WE'RE STILL ON THE SHT END OF THE STICK.

As individuals, we are not. As individuals, we are now free.

Free to exercise our butts off in tiny workout clothes in front of our kids and stand up to the naysayers and say oh yeah? what's your excuse for not being awesome, when we finally have the right to be.

I am awesome.

I am not a bully.

I don't call people names based on some wacky assumptions I've made up in my head about them.

no one called names.

You called me both mentally unstable and creepy.
Perhaps not exactly 'name calling', but close enough.
I wasn't that ugly about her, you or anyone in the forums. AT ALL.
Because I view a picture differently than others might, I have been accused of any number of personality disorders.
Simply uncalled for in an adult conversation.
Not much different than people saying nasty things about her parenting having never met her.

Which, might I remind you, I never did. My comments were limited to the photo in question.

What you quoted was an entirely different conversation.

rprussell2004

My "side" is that your personal example is not proof that every mother living in poverty has the opportunity to become fit. They don't necessarily have to be fat, but sometimes regular workouts simply is not possible. Some people have really hard lives.

I'm still waiting for an example. I asked for one a couple pages ago.

What, do you want him to go out and interview people until he finds one for a thread on MFP?

Get real, and GTFO of the dreamland you're living in. The rest of us are in the real world.

whierd

That's awesome. Are you saying that means no other mother of three has any excuse for not doing the same? Even if they live elsewhere or work more hours or have more expenses or make less? Because otherwise, I don't see your point.

It costs $0 to get in shape. ZERO. DOLLARS.

Unless you consider that time is money, and the level of fitness depicted in the pic is not something that achieved without time.

They can always just stay fat. That is a valid option.

One doesn't have to be fat because one has limited time to workout.

i cant even - did yall see the flipflop - i cant i just cant. you win.

Woohoo!!! I wasn't aware there was a contest, but I love winning. Is there a prize?

But I didn't flip flop. We were dicussing fit and someone threw in fat. You don't have to be fat to be unfit.

We were discussing asthetics, not cardiovascular fitness.

I was discussing the money (and/or time) it takes to reach the level of fitness in the pic. But either way, being fat is separate issue.

She appears fit because of a low bodyfat percentage, so fat is relevant hete. And I said if you do not want to take the time to exercise to become fit (and appear fit as a result), then you could always just stay fat.

One could only stay fat if one was already fat. She appears fit because she is fit. If her BF% were several points higher she'd still appear fit.

A few pointa higher? Maybe. 5-10% more? Not so much.

Lauren8239

Wowsers. How is this thread still going and rolled over?
Stop bickering.
:huh:

DamePiglet

What you quoted was an entirely different conversation.

I'll be d@mned, you're right. Thanks. The quotes are getting deep. :-)

bcattoes

My "side" is that your personal example is not proof that every mother living in poverty has the opportunity to become fit. They don't necessarily have to be fat, but sometimes regular workouts simply is not possible. Some people have really hard lives.

I'm still waiting for an example. I asked for one a couple pages ago.

Mom of three, deadbeat drunken unemployed husband, working one full and 2 part times in fast food. Husband drinks a good percentage of her income, so she eats free at the fast food places and spends her money buying food and clothing for the kids. She works 70-90 hrs per week and the rest is spent on housework, laundry, nurturing the kids, cleaning up after the deadbeat and sleep. No family or friends to help.

rml_16

My "side" is that your personal example is not proof that every mother living in poverty has the opportunity to become fit. They don't necessarily have to be fat, but sometimes regular workouts simply is not possible. Some people have really hard lives.

I'm still waiting for an example. I asked for one a couple pages ago.

What, do you want him to go out and interview people until he finds one for a thread on MFP?

Get real, and GTFO of the dreamland you're living in. The rest of us are in the real world.

No. I want an example of when financial constraints make it impossible to exercise and eat fewer calories.

yoovie

You called me both mentally unstable and creepy.
Perhaps not exactly 'name calling', but close enough.
I wasn't that ugly about her, you or anyone in the forums. AT ALL.
Because I view a picture differently than others might, I have been accused of any number of personality disorders.
Simply uncalled for in an adult conversation.
Not much different than people saying nasty things about her parenting having never met her.

Which, might I remind you, I never did. My comments were limited to the photo in question.

I didnt call you mentally unstable and creepy.

I said that anyone who thinks that it is creepy to be near your children in a two piece work-outfit, or a swimsuit, already has the wrong stuff going on up there in their noggin.

if this fits your mindset, then you are recognizing that bit about yourself. I dont even know you, therefore I cant be held responsible for what you identify with when Im speaking in general. and i most certainly never said YOU - i dont even know your username - i know you have a vaguely blue-ish avatar and i think there's a dolphin or a seal or something in there - dunno.

if you think that its sexually creepy to be around your kids in a swimsuit, i cannot reason or interact with you. But I wish you a good day.

PikaKnight

My "side" is that your personal example is not proof that every mother living in poverty has the opportunity to become fit. They don't necessarily have to be fat, but sometimes regular workouts simply is not possible. Some people have really hard lives.

I'm still waiting for an example. I asked for one a couple pages ago.

Mom of three, deadbeat drunken unemployed husband, working one full and 2 part times in fast food. Husband drinks a good percentage of her income, so she eats free at the fast food places and spends her money buying food and clothing for the kids. She works 70-90 hrs per week and the rest is spent on housework, laundry, nurturing the kids, cleaning up after the deadbeat and sleep. No family or friends to help.

So why is she still with her husband? There are women that have left this situation and done just fine. Again....it's an excuse and I hope this woman finds a way to stand on her two feet and better her life in every way - for both her and her children.

yoouperh

Alright I'm fat, I'm a single mom, but my kid didn't make me fat, I have been overweight since I was 12, I'm not blaming anyone but me, and I'm going to say this picture doesn't hurt my feelings, it reminds me of what all my sweat in the gym is for, and what all those squats and push ups are going to do for my body. She has a healthy background which might make it easier for her to make some choices, but she still has to wake up and say, "I'm going to pass on the Hershey's and eat something healthy instead!" It's something we all have to do. So, assuming this picture wasn't photo shopped to really give her more definition than she has... I agree with her, what's your excuse? I have my excuses and each time I make one I come up with 10 more reasons why I should be more healthy and why I want to be strong and persevere.
I didn't start out with awesome abs or a toned little butt, so I can't expect that I will look that way over night. Keep working and when you get to your goal you can take a picture like that and caption it "I make no excuses!" That's my plan!