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.
Fat Acceptance Movement
Replies
-
My biggest issue with the "fat acceptance movement" is that it often tries to push thin/skinny/athletic/petite bodies down to make them feel better. "Only a dog wants a bone", "No one wants to snuggle a stick", "Real women have curves".
I want people to like their own bodies, it's not a good feeling to hate yourself. But, don't put my body down to make yourself feel better about yours! My body structure means I will not have the curvy hourglass figure - the closest i'll ever get involves a billion squats and a boob job. Just because I have the "socially accepted" body doesn't mean I don't have my own insecurities.
I don't have to like your body. I don't have to find it attractive. I don't make cruel, unwanted or nasty remarks. I don't push/talk about my weight, health, exercise or lifestyle (unless asked). I DO expect you to do the same.48 -
ArmyofAdrian wrote: »I don't know what definition of obesity you are using, but we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'm going with the CDC's definition of obesity: "Weight that is higher than what is considered as a healthy weight for a given height is described as overweight or obese. " A weight that is higher than what is healthy would be unhealthy.
Also, the AMA, The World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists each recognize obesity as a disease. A disease is included in the set of things that are unhealthy.
Of course, the line between healthy and unhealthy is uniform for a height regardless of any other factors? That seems very, very arbitrary to me. The BMI definition of obesity is population-statistical. It's uninformative for any individual.
How can it be arbitrary when it's based on statistical analysis? Anyway, quibbling over the diagnostic criteria doesn't change the plain fact that obesity is unhealthy.3 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »@sunnybeaches105 thanks for the way you worded that. People who accept themselves get acceptance from the rest?
That's not quite what I said. I said they stop seeking approval (and I'll add) or at least calm it down a bit. Part of accepting ourselves is understanding that we aren't going to be loved or even liked by everyone else. That understanding can help bring us peace.
I see a lot of anger in this movement. I don't think it is just people who are angry about being bullied for being overweight. If that's all this movement was about then I'd be 100% behind it.
I think I also see people who are overeating because of emotional issues and are simply angry. I say this because I'm seeing the same attitudes I've seen in drug addicts and alcoholics who are hurting. People find a variety of ways to cope with hurt, and they get angry when someone wants to take that coping mechanism away. I think that's why a group of people who preach body acceptance, an end to body shaming, and self-love are also lashing out at thin and fit people and doing the very things to thin women they are saying are wrong. I say women because see it the most against thin women and girls. Someone mentioned the "real women" and "only dogs like bones" comments. Those comments aren't made out of self-acceptance and love, they're made out of anger and hate. I see comments like that and I'm not seeing someone's weight, I'm seeing a person in pain who is lashing out and probably needs counseling and support. I'm not going to get behind something that helps prevent people from getting help. If someone wants to make this about an end to bullying, and I don't mean an end to genuine concern for a loved ones and others we care for, then I'm there. But, that's not what I see.
15 -
ArmyofAdrian wrote: »ArmyofAdrian wrote: »I don't know what definition of obesity you are using, but we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'm going with the CDC's definition of obesity: "Weight that is higher than what is considered as a healthy weight for a given height is described as overweight or obese. " A weight that is higher than what is healthy would be unhealthy.
Also, the AMA, The World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists each recognize obesity as a disease. A disease is included in the set of things that are unhealthy.
Of course, the line between healthy and unhealthy is uniform for a height regardless of any other factors? That seems very, very arbitrary to me. The BMI definition of obesity is population-statistical. It's uninformative for any individual.
How can it be arbitrary when it's based on statistical analysis? Anyway, quibbling over the diagnostic criteria doesn't change the plain fact that obesity is unhealthy.
For several reasons. One, BMI does not include sufficient variables to adequately be more than an estimation for an individual. Two, BMI does not adequately cover sufficient populations to really develop an all-inclusive model with the variables it does include (i.e. the model doesn't fit well for Asians as an example). It also does not fit the very short or the very tall. Three, how exactly were cut-offs picked? They have some basis in risk analysis, but what level of risk is considered unacceptable is basically arbitrary.
Back to the OP - degrading anyone based on their looks or apparent health is wrong. Acting as though high weights aren't a potential problem is wrong as well. I'm pretty sure we can all agree that for everyone there is a weight at which that person will have health issues as a result. Acting as though that isn't true doesn't help anyone.
It also isn't helpful to harangue someone with whom you have no personal connection. If you're a close friend, a close family member, the person's doctor or medical team maybe you know them well enough to do it in a way where you can get some traction (though I think in the majority of cases approaching it in such a fashion is a mistake).
People should be educated about the risks of being overweight/obese, and I think most are. I think there are a lot of individuals denying that these things can happen to them, but isn't that par for the course? I can't think of any risky behaviour where that isn't the case.8 -
@sunnybeaches105 thanks for your reply.0
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »@sunnybeaches105 thanks for your reply.
NP. Apologies I didn't see your comment sooner.0 -
I was obese and was well educated on the 'why' it was bad for me. Until MFP I was struggling with the 'how' to fix it.
It seems we are good at telling others they are broken but never show them options on how they can fix themselves. In the end I had to make a lot of missteps to learn what worked for me. I think I had to hit rock bottom health wise before I looked up and saw light. Being a senior citizen and realizing I was killing myself prematurely one bit at a time was a strange experience. I am greatly I had it and it lead to making a move that I considered radical at the time and was told so by others. I realized in my personal case if I was going to live much longer it was going be left up to me instead of the ones that I knew with the Rx pads.3 -
The people I know who are in my age group (seniors) and morbidly obese have ALL had knee and/or hip replacements as well as diabetes, etc. I think "Health At Any Size" may be hard to maintain over the long haul.12
-
caffeinatedcami wrote: »I was thinking about body image issues (my own and society's in general) and I learned about something called the Fat Acceptance Movement. The Healthy at Any Size Movement is related to this as well. I am curious what people's thoughts on this are.
Personally I am of two minds about it. I have never been clinically overweight but I definitely flirted with the normal-overweight bmi boundary at one point. I have had body image issues since I was a teenager and three of my immediate family members have suffered from anorexia. So I know the toll that negative body image can have on a person. Everyone should love themselves regardless of their size. And fat-shaming should not be tolerated. However, I agree with a lot of the points made in this blog post "6 Things I Don't Understand About the Fat Acceptance Movement". At a certain point does it really demonstrate self-love to give up on weight loss? What are your thoughts?
http://thoughtcatalog.com/carolyn-hall/2014/04/6-things-i-dont-understand-about-the-fat-acceptance-movement/
I do not believe in shaming anyone for the size, whether it's "too thin" or "too heavy". However, I'm not going to pretend that being overweight is healthy - it's not. It's puts you at risk for too many things. I don't think people are or stay fat out of laziness though, I don't think that's the case at all. I think a lot of times, it's a health issue that's stopping them. I've had my worst struggle for the last 2 years because I developed Osteoarthritis in my spine. So basically, my body is fighting me tooth and nail. It's no one's place to shame anyone because you don't know their story. You don't know whether they work out 5 times a week, eat healthy and are still not losing weight because perhaps their A1C is high. You don't know if they eat like crazy and still struggle to keep weight on. You don't know. Period.
5 -
enterdanger wrote: »I'm just over the word "shaming." Its over used and I don't think shame is an external emotion. No one can "make you" feel shame. Shame comes within.
If you were truly happy with yourself you wouldn't feel shame regardless of someone else's actions. The whole thing is kinda stupid.
No, we shouldn't discriminate against people based on size. I know fat jerks and I know skinny jerks.
You're right, no one can make you feel "shame" but they can hurt you nonetheless. However, "shaming" is a verb - an act of trying to make someone feel bad about something. So don't try and blame the people who are being bullied/shamed, blame the jackholes doing it. And yes, you may not feel shame about something, but once someone publicly (it's usually public) chastises you for something that they don't agree with, it does take an emotional toll. Again, don't blame the people who are hurt by the jackholes, blame the jackhole.
10 -
ArmyofAdrian wrote: »ArmyofAdrian wrote: »I don't know what definition of obesity you are using, but we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'm going with the CDC's definition of obesity: "Weight that is higher than what is considered as a healthy weight for a given height is described as overweight or obese. " A weight that is higher than what is healthy would be unhealthy.
Also, the AMA, The World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists each recognize obesity as a disease. A disease is included in the set of things that are unhealthy.
Of course, the line between healthy and unhealthy is uniform for a height regardless of any other factors? That seems very, very arbitrary to me. The BMI definition of obesity is population-statistical. It's uninformative for any individual.
How can it be arbitrary when it's based on statistical analysis? Anyway, quibbling over the diagnostic criteria doesn't change the plain fact that obesity is unhealthy.
For several reasons. One, BMI does not include sufficient variables to adequately be more than an estimation for an individual. Two, BMI does not adequately cover sufficient populations to really develop an all-inclusive model with the variables it does include (i.e. the model doesn't fit well for Asians as an example). It also does not fit the very short or the very tall. Three, how exactly were cut-offs picked? They have some basis in risk analysis, but what level of risk is considered unacceptable is basically arbitrary.
Basing a criterion on its statistical significance using huge data sets is not at all "arbitrary".1 -
The people I know who are in my age group (seniors) and morbidly obese have ALL had knee and/or hip replacements as well as diabetes, etc. I think "Health At Any Size" may be hard to maintain over the long haul.
I know it was two friends that had to be put in a nursing home just because they were too heavy for the family to manage at home that help wake up my fat butt and do something about it.6 -
People shouldn't be shamed, and weight alone isn't the only factor in determining healthiness. But at the end of the day, how different is over eating from over drinking or smoking? I have similar reactions to seeing someone who is grossly overweight, underweight, drunk, or smoking. It creates health issues that are up to that person to live with, but they also can create medical costs that society must absorb. I'm all for people not feeling ashamed for anything, but as a society, I think it's misguided to downplay health issues that result from being overweight. The core message of those movements is good, but it seems easy for people to use it as an excuse to keep getting more unhealthy.6
-
I don't hate fat people or thin people- however you are NOT healthy at any size. Overly thin or overly fat is not healthy. That being said, I don't thinking shaming people is acceptable, fat or thin. So many of the fat acceptance movement turn out to be 'thin-shaming' Another person's decision is their decision and doesn't really affect me.5
-
snowflake930 wrote: »My question to those who say people should take responsibility for themselves, is, "what business is it of yours?"
Why does it matter to you what someone else does or doesn't do? How does it concern you?
Like others have said above, "mind your own business".
Kind of ironic that this is a web site mostly about getting healthier. Try a little compassion for people that have not found this site, or can not make it work for them. Walk a mile in their shoes. Cuz I have been there, done that, lost a lot of weight and have kept it off for over 2 years, thanks to MFP, my fitbit, and a lot of compassionate, helpful people here.
If you pay taxes or insurance it's your busiess. Obesity related illnesses count for over 20% of medical spending in thr US.
So far, in most cases, the obese don't pay highwe insurance premiums or more taxes (over 50% of medical costs are paid by government)9 -
Packerjohn wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »My question to those who say people should take responsibility for themselves, is, "what business is it of yours?"
Why does it matter to you what someone else does or doesn't do? How does it concern you?
Like others have said above, "mind your own business".
Kind of ironic that this is a web site mostly about getting healthier. Try a little compassion for people that have not found this site, or can not make it work for them. Walk a mile in their shoes. Cuz I have been there, done that, lost a lot of weight and have kept it off for over 2 years, thanks to MFP, my fitbit, and a lot of compassionate, helpful people here.
If you pay taxes or insurance it's your busiess. Obesity related illnesses count for over 20% of medical spending in thr US.
So far, in most cases, the obese don't pay highwe insurance premiums or more taxes (over 50% of medical costs are paid by government)
It's coming though. My husband works for a large, global company (based out of the U.S. and has over 100,000 employees). In the last couple years things have changed with our insurance, where it's now mandatory to submit blood work/weight details, in order to not get penalized for health insurance. It's also mandatory that we're screened for smoking.
It started out that if you didn't do this, then you lost HSA deposit incentives (up to $500 per employee/spouse). This year they changed it and if you don't get the blood work done then you actually pay a 'fine' and pay more for your premium. And smokers pay an additional fine on top of that. We've been told that soon there will also be fines for not having good blood work/having high bmi's.
My husband has higher cholesterol and soon we'll be paying more for our insurance because of it. People who have a higher bmi (by the criteria that the insurance company goes by), will also incur fines. And if you're a smoker, then you get hit twice. I don't know if you get triple fines if you fail at all three things (overweight, bad blood work, smoker), but it wouldn't surprise me at all. This applies for spouses of employees as well.6 -
ReaderGirl3 this is also the way it is where my wife works and the reason I am working on my lipids that when crazy right after I went LCHF in 2014. This time I am going to find a way to get the LDL particle size/count.0
-
ReaderGirl3 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »My question to those who say people should take responsibility for themselves, is, "what business is it of yours?"
Why does it matter to you what someone else does or doesn't do? How does it concern you?
Like others have said above, "mind your own business".
Kind of ironic that this is a web site mostly about getting healthier. Try a little compassion for people that have not found this site, or can not make it work for them. Walk a mile in their shoes. Cuz I have been there, done that, lost a lot of weight and have kept it off for over 2 years, thanks to MFP, my fitbit, and a lot of compassionate, helpful people here.
If you pay taxes or insurance it's your busiess. Obesity related illnesses count for over 20% of medical spending in thr US.
So far, in most cases, the obese don't pay highwe insurance premiums or more taxes (over 50% of medical costs are paid by government)
It's coming though. My husband works for a large, global company (based out of the U.S. and has over 100,000 employees). In the last couple years things have changed with our insurance, where it's now mandatory to submit blood work/weight details, in order to not get penalized for health insurance. It's also mandatory that we're screened for smoking. It started out that if you didn't do this, then you lost HSA deposit incentives (up to $500 per employee/spouse). This year they changed it and if you don't get the blood work done then you actually pay a 'fine' and pay more for your premium. And smokers pay an additional fine on top of that. We've been told that soon there will also be fines for not having good blood work/having high bmi's. My numbers are great. but my husband has higher cholesterol and soon we'll be paying more for our insurance because of it.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand smoking and obesity are issues that an individual has the capability of addressing (in contrast to getting cancer, for example). OTOH, smoking is usually an addiction and obesity can be caused by an eating disorder, both of which are conditions that shouldn't be penalized. Sure, not every single smoker is addicted and not every obese person has an eating disorder but it'd be difficult to weed those people out. Should people pay a fat tax or not? I'm not sure what's reasonable and I'm not sure if charging extra is going to be a wake-up call or just make them more resigned to their size.
I like the idea of encouraging people to be aware of their health, such as requiring them to submit their blood work (or giving them credit for doing so) and, if they smoke or are overweight, requiring them to sign a form indicating they're aware of the health consequences. I also think that if someone smokes or is obese they could be given resources for support and other positive reinforcement. Support groups, free doctor's appointments/labs, cooking classes, etc. (It surprises me how many adults I know who never cook at home because they don't know how.)
Edit: fixed typo0 -
DearestWinter wrote: »ReaderGirl3 wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »snowflake930 wrote: »My question to those who say people should take responsibility for themselves, is, "what business is it of yours?"
Why does it matter to you what someone else does or doesn't do? How does it concern you?
Like others have said above, "mind your own business".
Kind of ironic that this is a web site mostly about getting healthier. Try a little compassion for people that have not found this site, or can not make it work for them. Walk a mile in their shoes. Cuz I have been there, done that, lost a lot of weight and have kept it off for over 2 years, thanks to MFP, my fitbit, and a lot of compassionate, helpful people here.
If you pay taxes or insurance it's your busiess. Obesity related illnesses count for over 20% of medical spending in thr US.
So far, in most cases, the obese don't pay highwe insurance premiums or more taxes (over 50% of medical costs are paid by government)
It's coming though. My husband works for a large, global company (based out of the U.S. and has over 100,000 employees). In the last couple years things have changed with our insurance, where it's now mandatory to submit blood work/weight details, in order to not get penalized for health insurance. It's also mandatory that we're screened for smoking. It started out that if you didn't do this, then you lost HSA deposit incentives (up to $500 per employee/spouse). This year they changed it and if you don't get the blood work done then you actually pay a 'fine' and pay more for your premium. And smokers pay an additional fine on top of that. We've been told that soon there will also be fines for not having good blood work/having high bmi's. My numbers are great. but my husband has higher cholesterol and soon we'll be paying more for our insurance because of it.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand smoking and obesity are issues that an individual has the capability of addressing (in contrast to getting cancer, for example). OTOH, smoking is usually an addiction and obesity can be caused by an eating disorder, both of which are conditions that shouldn't be penalized. Sure, not every single smoker is addicted and not every obese person has an eating disorder but it'd be difficult to weed those people out. Should people pay a fat tax or not? I'm not sure what's reasonable and I'm not sure charging extra is going to be a wake-up call or just make them more resigned to their size.
I like the idea of encouraging people to be aware of their health, such as requiring them to submit their blood work (or giving them credit for doing so) and, if they smoke or are overweight, requiring them to sign a form indicating they're aware of the health consequences. I also think that if someone smokes or is obese they could be given resources for support and other positive reinforcement. Support groups, free doctor's appointments/labs, cooking classes, etc. (It surprises me how many adults I know who never cook at home because they don't know how.)
Edit: fixed typo
My husband is 6ft tall and around 190lbs, so just above the normal bmi range. His dad is thin and also has high cholesterol and high bp. Husband's grandfather on his father's side was thin and had heart disease/bypass surgery. My husband did lose a few pounds when this first rolled out (the fines for bmi/blood work then got postponed-they ended up targeting the smokers first). When my husband lost the weight his cholesterol numbers didn't improve (his bmi score did though). So when the next phase starts we'll be penalized for having a medical conditions outside of my husband's control. It sucks but I understand why they're doing it.0 -
ArmyofAdrian wrote: »ArmyofAdrian wrote: »ArmyofAdrian wrote: »I don't know what definition of obesity you are using, but we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'm going with the CDC's definition of obesity: "Weight that is higher than what is considered as a healthy weight for a given height is described as overweight or obese. " A weight that is higher than what is healthy would be unhealthy.
Also, the AMA, The World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists each recognize obesity as a disease. A disease is included in the set of things that are unhealthy.
Of course, the line between healthy and unhealthy is uniform for a height regardless of any other factors? That seems very, very arbitrary to me. The BMI definition of obesity is population-statistical. It's uninformative for any individual.
How can it be arbitrary when it's based on statistical analysis? Anyway, quibbling over the diagnostic criteria doesn't change the plain fact that obesity is unhealthy.
For several reasons. One, BMI does not include sufficient variables to adequately be more than an estimation for an individual. Two, BMI does not adequately cover sufficient populations to really develop an all-inclusive model with the variables it does include (i.e. the model doesn't fit well for Asians as an example). It also does not fit the very short or the very tall. Three, how exactly were cut-offs picked? They have some basis in risk analysis, but what level of risk is considered unacceptable is basically arbitrary.
Basing a criterion on its statistical significance using huge data sets is not at all "arbitrary".
Deciding that a 20.1% risk* is unacceptable whereas a 20% risk* is acceptable is arbitrary. There is no standard for when health risk crosses from 'acceptable' to not.
Also, when dealing with global population and physiological diversity, I'd hardly consider the sampling used to generate the BMI model as 'huge'.
*Not actual numbers, used only as an example.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions