"Asking if I've lost weight isn't a compliment"
Options
Replies
-
It contains zero (0) slippery slope. It was a comparison of the tendency of people to name things in ways that attempt to forestall debate on the merits of the idea.
Can I quote in here where people have used slippery slope and complained about "we can't say merry christmas" because of this? Can I quote where people have asked endless where this is going to end, and soon we won't be able to do "X"? Yeah, I can, but maybe we're not reading the same thread.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Can you tell me where anyone asserted that the author did so, rather than simply disagreeing with her?I love the amount of slippery slope in this thread.
Apparently one woman asks people to consider she that some people don't want to talk about their weight, including using it as a compliment, and the results are: we're all going to car crash, cancel all holidays, and possibly have immigrants come take our guns away in the night.
Could anyone tell me where the author asked this become some kind of national law, that we can't say "have you lost weight" to people without 90+ days in a gulag? I really missed that part of the article.
You in particular were the one that brought up how the HAES common sense calls are like using the term common sense for gun control, and immigration reform. There's a metric ton of slippery slope.
But, please, describe how I used the comparison as a slippery slope argument. Please. I mean, where, exactly, did I argue that some event must inevitably follow from some other event?
0 -
DianaLovesCoffee wrote: »"I finally stopped worrying about the kilos and focused on just being happy and healthy. I don't know what I weigh anymore, but I do know what I'm worth."
This is an OXYMORON. By not weighing yourself, and being "satisfied" with being obese, your are NOT being healthy.
At what point in this statement does she say she is obese? Maybe she is. Maybe not. But you are ASSUMING she is. I know lots of weightlifters who don't care or know about their actual weight. It is all their appearance and strength.
Did you read the whole thread? She self identifies elsewhere as fat.
0 -
PrizePopple wrote: »After the whole HAES 'print out' for the doctor that was linked a few weeks ago that included a staunch refusal to be weighed I have zero respect for the movement truly believing in health. :noway:
I didn't see that one! I spent years not looking at the scale when I was weighed (DENIAL!!!), but that's important medical information!
0 -
The bolded claim is kind of saying slippery slope is valid. I don't argue that HAES is wrong, and the woman has HAES undertones, but jumping to claims that she's going to ask to outlaw doctors talking about weight before she does is making a straw man.PeachyCarol wrote: »I love the amount of slippery slope in this thread.
Apparently one woman asks people to consider she that some people don't want to talk about their weight, including using it as a compliment, and the results are: we're all going to car crash, cancel all holidays, and possibly have immigrants come take our guns away in the night.
Could anyone tell me where the author asked this become some kind of national law, that we can't say "have you lost weight" to people without 90+ days in a gulag? I really missed that part of the article.
Because there's a movement out there. Some of us are guessing she's part of it, going by her rhetoric. We're countering the arguments they make.
The problem with your argument is that any idea in its genesis can gain traction and take hold and shape how people, as a society behave over time. Most of the time, this is a good thing, look at the changing attitudes towards homosexuality and minorities, for example.
There's nothing wrong with the fight to stigmatize fat shaming, but I think some of its proponents take things too far. The article writer is one of them.
As I view it, she's a person who has had a very unhealthy relationship with her weight in the past, and asks people to consider, she doesn't want to talk about it. Considering social stress can cause atherscloersis even in highly active wild primates, perhaps the risk assessment of avoiding a stressor for her outweighs (oh unintented pun) the health benefits of losing weight. Sure, in an ideal world, she'd work through her issues and lose weight, but that's not the world we're in.
See, I see people in here telling her she needs to be charitable in interpreting what people say to her, as it is intended as a compliment. Yet, I don't see many people being charitable to her about why she and other people might not want to talk about weight.0 -
Can I quote in here where people have used slippery slope and complained about "we can't say merry christmas" because of this? Can I quote where people have asked endless where this is going to end, and soon we won't be able to do "X"? Yeah, I can, but maybe we're not reading the same thread.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Can you tell me where anyone asserted that the author did so, rather than simply disagreeing with her?I love the amount of slippery slope in this thread.
Apparently one woman asks people to consider she that some people don't want to talk about their weight, including using it as a compliment, and the results are: we're all going to car crash, cancel all holidays, and possibly have immigrants come take our guns away in the night.
Could anyone tell me where the author asked this become some kind of national law, that we can't say "have you lost weight" to people without 90+ days in a gulag? I really missed that part of the article.
You in particular were the one that brought up how the HAES common sense calls are like using the term common sense for gun control, and immigration reform. There's a metric ton of slippery slope.
Please do.
The article may have spurred a discussion about similar things that are already happening, so as to draw a comparison - but it certainly didn't create those things.0 -
Yeah, the X happened therefore Y will necessarily happen bit of the slippery slope fallacy seems to be, well, missing.TheVirgoddess wrote: »
Can I quote in here where people have used slippery slope and complained about "we can't say merry christmas" because of this? Can I quote where people have asked endless where this is going to end, and soon we won't be able to do "X"? Yeah, I can, but maybe we're not reading the same thread.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Can you tell me where anyone asserted that the author did so, rather than simply disagreeing with her?I love the amount of slippery slope in this thread.
Apparently one woman asks people to consider she that some people don't want to talk about their weight, including using it as a compliment, and the results are: we're all going to car crash, cancel all holidays, and possibly have immigrants come take our guns away in the night.
Could anyone tell me where the author asked this become some kind of national law, that we can't say "have you lost weight" to people without 90+ days in a gulag? I really missed that part of the article.
You in particular were the one that brought up how the HAES common sense calls are like using the term common sense for gun control, and immigration reform. There's a metric ton of slippery slope.
Please do.
The article may have spurred a discussion about similar things that are already happening, so as to draw a comparison - but it certainly didn't create those things.
0 -
I think it's the best motivation when people start commenting on my weightloss! It reminds me how hard I've worked and proves it is actually making a difference. Sometimes it is difficult to see the changes yourself and it is nice to be reminded.0
-
It's a combination of slippery slope with black/white fallacy. "These things are called common sense ideas and I don't like them". "If we start letting common sense calls through, we'll get X, Y, and Z". Instead, we could just weigh each thing on its own merits. The woman obviously has issues around weight, in the article, she described what I'd call an eating disorder as a teenager. The charitable interpretation of the article is she's saying people could consider she and other people could have those kind of issues and would rather not be complimented on weight. Yet a lot of people in here bring up where will it end if we avoid offending people.DeguelloTex wrote: »
It contains zero (0) slippery slope. It was a comparison of the tendency of people to name things in ways that attempt to forestall debate on the merits of the idea.
Can I quote in here where people have used slippery slope and complained about "we can't say merry christmas" because of this? Can I quote where people have asked endless where this is going to end, and soon we won't be able to do "X"? Yeah, I can, but maybe we're not reading the same thread.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Can you tell me where anyone asserted that the author did so, rather than simply disagreeing with her?I love the amount of slippery slope in this thread.
Apparently one woman asks people to consider she that some people don't want to talk about their weight, including using it as a compliment, and the results are: we're all going to car crash, cancel all holidays, and possibly have immigrants come take our guns away in the night.
Could anyone tell me where the author asked this become some kind of national law, that we can't say "have you lost weight" to people without 90+ days in a gulag? I really missed that part of the article.
You in particular were the one that brought up how the HAES common sense calls are like using the term common sense for gun control, and immigration reform. There's a metric ton of slippery slope.
But, please, describe how I used the comparison as a slippery slope argument. Please. I mean, where, exactly, did I argue that some event must inevitably follow from some other event?0 -
Who said I didn't like them? You're reading way, way too much into this and there simply is no slippery slope fallacy involved here, at all, period. Nowhere, and I mean literally nowhere, did I state, imply, or say anything from which anyone could reasonably infer that I am asserting any kind of connection between naming something "Health At Every Size" or something like the PATRIOT Act other than they are both examples of trying to frame debate through labels. That's it. Period. There's no other there there.
It's a combination of slippery slope with black/white fallacy. "These things are called common sense ideas and I don't like them". "If we start letting common sense calls through, we'll get X, Y, and Z". Instead, we could just weigh each thing on its own merits. The woman obviously has issues around weight, in the article, she described what I'd call an eating disorder as a teenager. The charitable interpretation of the article is she's saying people could consider she and other people could have those kind of issues and would rather not be complimented on weight. Yet a lot of people in here bring up where will it end if we avoid offending people.DeguelloTex wrote: »
It contains zero (0) slippery slope. It was a comparison of the tendency of people to name things in ways that attempt to forestall debate on the merits of the idea.
Can I quote in here where people have used slippery slope and complained about "we can't say merry christmas" because of this? Can I quote where people have asked endless where this is going to end, and soon we won't be able to do "X"? Yeah, I can, but maybe we're not reading the same thread.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Can you tell me where anyone asserted that the author did so, rather than simply disagreeing with her?I love the amount of slippery slope in this thread.
Apparently one woman asks people to consider she that some people don't want to talk about their weight, including using it as a compliment, and the results are: we're all going to car crash, cancel all holidays, and possibly have immigrants come take our guns away in the night.
Could anyone tell me where the author asked this become some kind of national law, that we can't say "have you lost weight" to people without 90+ days in a gulag? I really missed that part of the article.
You in particular were the one that brought up how the HAES common sense calls are like using the term common sense for gun control, and immigration reform. There's a metric ton of slippery slope.
But, please, describe how I used the comparison as a slippery slope argument. Please. I mean, where, exactly, did I argue that some event must inevitably follow from some other event?
ETA:
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:
Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.
***
Now, cite something I wrote which follows that pattern.0 -
I'm amazed that in the same thread where people say people are too thin skinned over "have you lost some weight?", we get people being thin skinned over "happy holidays."
Oh noooo, someone offering sincere good wishes to you! Telling you to have a happy holiday, which is exactly what Christmas is! So awful!! Much offense!!0 -
Who said you didn't like them? Well, you called them indefensible, which generally isn't considered a positive comment on things.DeguelloTex wrote: »Who said I didn't like them? You're reading way, way too much into this and there simply is no slippery slope fallacy involved here, at all, period. Nowhere, and I mean literally nowhere, did I state, imply, or say anything from which anyone could reasonably infer that I am asserting any kind of connection between naming something "Health At Every Size" or something like the PATRIOT Act other than they are both examples of trying to frame debate through labels. That's it. Period. There's no other there there.
ETA:
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:
Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.
***
Now, cite something I wrote which follows that pattern.
If I inferred wrong that you felt they were good and yet indefensible, my apologies.DeguelloTex wrote: »Oh, I think they have looked at it very closely. There's a growing tendency here to label things as "common sense" -- common sense gun control, common sense immigration reform, common sense tax reform -- because, hey, who's against common sense? It seems that the more indefensible something is, the more likely it is to be labeled "common sense." It's a way of trying to frame the issue so as to be able to dismiss any opponents as crackpots who are against common sense, and thereby avoid the sticky business of actually defending a position by trying to shut off debate as unnecessary. It's sort of a passive-aggressive ad hominem, really, to the extent it doesn't shut people up in the first place.
You've gone from, HAES is bad, to HAES means people's voices will be dismissed on health care, and some how silenced (means left unspecified). And the whole thing stems from assuming this woman is advocating a strict Healthy At Every Size philosophy, but the article doesn't really get into it. At most, she's said, for her, the mental stress of dealing with weight might be more unhealthy than actually living with being overweight.DeguelloTex wrote: »So, if you're against health at any size, you're clearly a loon who can and should be dismissed because you hate health. People who hate health should have no voice.0 -
Funny thing is, we know very well what we are doing when we put on an outfit. We know that it makes x look smaller, y look bigger, form fitting, something that makes us look taller etc. Did she expect others not to notice the very reasons she chose her outfit that day? It's like wearing something specifically to show off your cleavage and expect others not to notice it. We gain or lose weight because we have a specific image in our minds of how we want to look or feel, and we admit in our minds that there are benefits to the weight gain or loss. So how is it rude for somebody to compliment on those things that we already understood?
I get compliments on my weight loss every 2 weeks or so at the gym (i have only lost 16 lbs, but I have been doing a lot of freeweights so I look like I lost more) I love that my hard work is noticed. I knew I didn't like the way It looked before I lost that weight, and I know that it looks better now, do we expect others not to have eyes and realize the same thing we do?
I am still about 25 lbs away from my weight loss goal and I am considered overweight, but this fat culture needs to stop. (as a fat person I think I have the right to have that opinion) People often say that fat people can be healthy too but are they taking into consideration that most "fat people" now days are actually morbidly obese? That' can't be healthy,.0 -
Have you lost weight?
a. Yes
b. No
c. I don't know/I don't care
As simple as that. It's just a question.
why do we care so much about other people's comments and opinions anyway? A comment can affect you only if you allow it to, so you can just choose not to care!0 -
It's like you're passing this stuff through a badly bugged English to senecarr translator and then responding. I've done none of those things. Where did I say that people's voices will be dismissed on healthcare? An actual quote of something I wrote would be helpful here. It seems like you're pretty seriously conflating what I perceive to be the goal of framing an issue as if it's not worthy of legitimate debate with actually succeeding in dismissing that debate. Or something.
Who said you didn't like them? Well, you called them indefensible, which generally isn't considered a positive comment on things.DeguelloTex wrote: »Who said I didn't like them? You're reading way, way too much into this and there simply is no slippery slope fallacy involved here, at all, period. Nowhere, and I mean literally nowhere, did I state, imply, or say anything from which anyone could reasonably infer that I am asserting any kind of connection between naming something "Health At Every Size" or something like the PATRIOT Act other than they are both examples of trying to frame debate through labels. That's it. Period. There's no other there there.
ETA:
The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:
Event X has occurred (or will or might occur).
Therefore event Y will inevitably happen.
***
Now, cite something I wrote which follows that pattern.
If I inferred wrong that you felt they were good and yet indefensible, my apologies.DeguelloTex wrote: »Oh, I think they have looked at it very closely. There's a growing tendency here to label things as "common sense" -- common sense gun control, common sense immigration reform, common sense tax reform -- because, hey, who's against common sense? It seems that the more indefensible something is, the more likely it is to be labeled "common sense." It's a way of trying to frame the issue so as to be able to dismiss any opponents as crackpots who are against common sense, and thereby avoid the sticky business of actually defending a position by trying to shut off debate as unnecessary. It's sort of a passive-aggressive ad hominem, really, to the extent it doesn't shut people up in the first place.
You've gone from, HAES is bad, to HAES means people's voices will be dismissed on health care, and some how silenced (means left unspecified). And the whole thing stems from assuming this woman is advocating a strict Healthy At Every Size philosophy, but the article doesn't really get into it. At most, she's said, for her, the mental stress of dealing with weight might be more unhealthy than actually living with being overweight.DeguelloTex wrote: »So, if you're against health at any size, you're clearly a loon who can and should be dismissed because you hate health. People who hate health should have no voice.0 -
Edited because this has already been covered Many times. 0
-
I really don't believe that people are more easily offended than before. It's just the internet and exploitative media have given them a much larger voice. Just recently there was an article about a protest in my city on how a "coalition" of women were protesting some offence and when I talked to one of the members it turns out it was coalition of about 10 people.
I can't think of anyone in my life who has been seriously offended by something in years; or at least offended enough to talk about it. My only exposure to all these upsets is through the media.0 -
I really don't believe that people are more easily offended than before. It's just the internet and exploitative media have given them a much larger voice. Just recently there was an article about a protest in my city on how a "coalition" of women were protesting some offence and when I talked to one of the members it turns out it was coalition of about 10 people.
I can't think of anyone in my life who has been seriously offended by something in years; or at least offended enough to talk about it. My only exposure to all these upsets is through the media.
That's a good point.
To add to it, when someone doesn't like something - it doesn't mean they're offended. I don't like when people call me skinny now - it bothers me. It doesn't offend me though, and it's not anything I'd ever address. I feel like dislike/annoy/irritate is interpreted as offensive in a lot of cases, and made a bigger deal than it really is (not necessarily by the person that's irritated, either).
There's an example to this in this thread. Someone said something raises their hackles and another person assigned the word offensive to it.
Off topic, sorry!0 -
I love it when people notice that I've lost weight0
-
I take it as a compliment because I'm trying to lose weight, and if they noticed, that means I'm successful at it. And if I'm successful at that, it means I can be successful at other things, which is a problem I've always had. I wouldn't say it to someone I didn't know, though, because I can see where some might take offense at it.0
-
I don't mind when people notice I've lost weight IF I've lost weight. I can somewhat see where the writer of the article was coming from though because I recently saw a few acquaintances that I had not seen in a year or so. I know I have gained a few pounds since I last saw them yet they greeted me with "you look nice, you've lost weight". Was I offended? Not really but I did comment to my husband on our way home that it's ridiculous that women have to mention weight and go so far as to say you've lost some when you clearly have not.
I'm in the camp that only mentions weight loss when I know the person has been trying and wants to receive such a comment. If I've not seen you then I don't mention it. I have a friend who has lost a ton of weight because she has chronic pancreatisis and is literally in agony every single times she eats. I know an early comment said you can tell when people aren't healthy but that's not always the case. When my friend makes enough effort with make-up you can't tell she's sick. I have two autoimmune disorders and a Chiari malformation that required brain surgery and I look perfectly healthy most of the time.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 392 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 927 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions