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.
No intimidation "gyms"
Replies
-
lynn_glenmont wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »To anyone who may have been living in an advertising wasteland and has missed the fact that PF's marketing campaign negatively targets what they call "lunks" - this one's for you:
https://youtu.be/yhDcjlYrwmQ
PS: No dog in this fight, either. I workout at home. Methinks their "Judgement Free Zone" campaign is merely a watered-down version of the same premise, though.
The narrative of all the PF ads I've seen posted on this thread (versus the ones I see on TV, which focus on low price and 24/7 hours) is
<snippage since I only want to address one point>
The ads in my area shifted over time. I remember when PF first started in the area. They went with the no-intimidation angle. BTW, I'm in the Philadelphia television market, so this isn't some small area of the country. I remember the ads like the ones posted in this thread.
Lately, the ads do stress the 24 hour availability and that it's clean like the ones you say you see.
0 -
Here's an idea --- re-read what you wrote, substituting an offensive term for some other group for "lunks" and "bros" and see how it sounds to you. It's not a good look.Exactly! And to take it further:
I don't have to be a racial minority to find racial stereotypes offensive.
I don't have to be gay to find homophobia offensive.
I don't have to be a woman to find sexual discrimination offensive.
I'm glad somebody else went there. I was trying hard to find a way to address it and stay within the lines. There's so much wrong there that it makes normal wrong look right.
That's pretty much what I was thinking when I posted my post but I was too busy sputtering with incredulity to think of an appropriate way to post it.2 -
Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »
I belong to PF, a community rec center, and a workplace gym - I’ve been a gym rat my entire adult life so I’ve seen it all when it comes to gym cultures.
I’m offended by very little, including PF animosity. I’m more amused than anything with this, the faux outrage / faux victim-hood associated with poking fun at “lunks”, as if they are some downtrodden race of people who are getting discriminated against. Can we redraft the 14th Amendment to include lunks? Check with your local Congressman, anything is possible.
The TV advertising targets a set of behaviors which are greatly exaggerated for amusement and easy to refrain from engaging in - the best response is to not give PF your ten bucks and invest your time in causes with actual victims who need your help, the bros at the gym are going to be just fine.
On the scale of problems in the world, this one is pretty minor. But... your post seems really entitled and dismissive to me. You get that there are PFs where real people in the actual world who innocently paid their 10 bucks and went to work out have had a loud noise and a flashing light single them out for ridicule, right? But.. they'll be just fine? This experience was only "poking fun at them"? And you know that's how they feel about it how exactly? Because you say so? And while you're at it, you'll also give them a dismissive nickname and mock the idea that maybe this is a bad idea?
Here's an idea --- re-read what you wrote, substituting an offensive term for some other group for "lunks" and "bros" and see how it sounds to you. It's not a good look.
So being a lunk or a bro, which is entirely a choice based upon one’s behavior, is the same as being a racial or ethnic minority, handicapped, homosexual, etc? No, just stop with this, seriously, you are marginalizing real discrimination and offensiveness.14 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »To anyone who may have been living in an advertising wasteland and has missed the fact that PF's marketing campaign negatively targets what they call "lunks" - this one's for you:https://youtu.be/yhDcjlYrwmQ
PS: No dog in this fight, either. I workout at home. Methinks their "Judgement Free Zone" campaign is merely a watered-down version of the same premise, though.
The narrative of all the PF ads I've seen posted on this thread (versus the ones I see on TV, which focus on low price and 24/7 hours) is
Prospective Customer: My experience or belief about gyms is horrible and absurd thing X. [Lunk alarm is part of anecdote/reminiscene of prospective customer]
PF employee trying to make a sale: That won't happen to you here. We're not a gym.
Not sure what TV you're seeing but all the national ads I've seen are the videos posted here which don't mention cost or hours. There may be some local ads that just focus on price and 24 hours (probably the case as not all PFs are 24/7). The national ads I've seen all start with examples of what PF considers examples stereotyped "lunk" behavior. Next, they show the perspective PF member in an almost confessional tone talking to the PF employee who looks at and talks to them like the employee is a grief counselor.3 -
Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »
I belong to PF, a community rec center, and a workplace gym - I’ve been a gym rat my entire adult life so I’ve seen it all when it comes to gym cultures.
I’m offended by very little, including PF animosity. I’m more amused than anything with this, the faux outrage / faux victim-hood associated with poking fun at “lunks”, as if they are some downtrodden race of people who are getting discriminated against. Can we redraft the 14th Amendment to include lunks? Check with your local Congressman, anything is possible.
The TV advertising targets a set of behaviors which are greatly exaggerated for amusement and easy to refrain from engaging in - the best response is to not give PF your ten bucks and invest your time in causes with actual victims who need your help, the bros at the gym are going to be just fine.
On the scale of problems in the world, this one is pretty minor. But... your post seems really entitled and dismissive to me. You get that there are PFs where real people in the actual world who innocently paid their 10 bucks and went to work out have had a loud noise and a flashing light single them out for ridicule, right? But.. they'll be just fine? This experience was only "poking fun at them"? And you know that's how they feel about it how exactly? Because you say so? And while you're at it, you'll also give them a dismissive nickname and mock the idea that maybe this is a bad idea?
Here's an idea --- re-read what you wrote, substituting an offensive term for some other group for "lunks" and "bros" and see how it sounds to you. It's not a good look.
So being a lunk or a bro, which is entirely a choice based upon one’s behavior, is the same as being a racial or ethnic minority, handicapped, homosexual, etc? No, just stop with this, seriously, you are marginalizing real discrimination and offensiveness.
I find that the ability to step back and actually listen to others is really helpful in discussions like this. I hear your concern about trivializing “real discrimination.” I’m technically a member of a group that has suffered a lot of discrimination, and while that’s not a big part of my identity I somewhat get the concern, although my personal experience of ethnic hate has been limited to hearing some random comments and jokes.
As a parent in a diverse, urban public school that’s also a leader in accommodating/accepting trans students (the school, not me - I’m just a dad), I’ve heard this kind of concern before from members of minority communities who are concerned that efforts to accommodate trans students will distract from their issues. The school’s approach - and it makes sense to me generally - is that the key to reaching common ground is to embrace a fundamental principle that discrimination and shaming are wrong, no matter who the targets are.
With that in mind, read what I wrote again. I noted that this is not a significant problem. But then I presented the scenario of a person who innocently pays their $10 and goes to PF to work out. A flashing light and alarm goes off specifically in order to humiliate them because they engage in a perfectly normal behavior that is in no sane universe intentionally offensive (grunting, clanking heavy weights ). And the company proudly touts their policy of humiliating customers in their advertising. This is objectivey offensive. Recognizing that doesn’t in any way marginalize “real” discrimination. In fact, recognizing a general principle of not shaming and singling people out tends to enhance efforts to fight all kinds of discrimination because it encourages a community of “all of us” rather and a bunch of competing “us against them” groups.13 -
Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »
I belong to PF, a community rec center, and a workplace gym - I’ve been a gym rat my entire adult life so I’ve seen it all when it comes to gym cultures.
I’m offended by very little, including PF animosity. I’m more amused than anything with this, the faux outrage / faux victim-hood associated with poking fun at “lunks”, as if they are some downtrodden race of people who are getting discriminated against. Can we redraft the 14th Amendment to include lunks? Check with your local Congressman, anything is possible.
The TV advertising targets a set of behaviors which are greatly exaggerated for amusement and easy to refrain from engaging in - the best response is to not give PF your ten bucks and invest your time in causes with actual victims who need your help, the bros at the gym are going to be just fine.
On the scale of problems in the world, this one is pretty minor. But... your post seems really entitled and dismissive to me. You get that there are PFs where real people in the actual world who innocently paid their 10 bucks and went to work out have had a loud noise and a flashing light single them out for ridicule, right? But.. they'll be just fine? This experience was only "poking fun at them"? And you know that's how they feel about it how exactly? Because you say so? And while you're at it, you'll also give them a dismissive nickname and mock the idea that maybe this is a bad idea?
Here's an idea --- re-read what you wrote, substituting an offensive term for some other group for "lunks" and "bros" and see how it sounds to you. It's not a good look.
So being a lunk or a bro, which is entirely a choice based upon one’s behavior, is the same as being a racial or ethnic minority, handicapped, homosexual, etc? No, just stop with this, seriously, you are marginalizing real discrimination and offensiveness.
I find that the ability to step back and actually listen to others is really helpful in discussions like this. I hear your concern about trivializing “real discrimination.” I’m technically a member of a group that has suffered a lot of discrimination, and while that’s not a big part of my identity I somewhat get the concern, although my personal experience of ethnic hate has been limited to hearing some random comments and jokes.
As a parent in a diverse, urban public school that’s also a leader in accommodating/accepting trans students (the school, not me - I’m just a dad), I’ve heard this kind of concern before from members of minority communities who are concerned that efforts to accommodate trans students will distract from their issues. The school’s approach - and it makes sense to me generally - is that the key to reaching common ground is to embrace a fundamental principle that discrimination and shaming are wrong, no matter who the targets are.
With that in mind, read what I wrote again. I noted that this is not a significant problem. But then I presented the scenario of a person who innocently pays their $10 and goes to PF to work out. A flashing light and alarm goes off specifically in order to humiliate them because they engage in a perfectly normal behavior that is in no sane universe intentionally offensive (grunting, clanking heavy weights ). And the company proudly touts their policy of humiliating customers in their advertising. This is objectivey offensive. Recognizing that doesn’t in any way marginalize “real” discrimination. In fact, recognizing a general principle of not shaming and singling people out tends to enhance efforts to fight all kinds of discrimination because it encourages a community of “all of us” rather and a bunch of competing “us against them” groups.
Well said! Especially the bolded.1 -
Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »
I belong to PF, a community rec center, and a workplace gym - I’ve been a gym rat my entire adult life so I’ve seen it all when it comes to gym cultures.
I’m offended by very little, including PF animosity. I’m more amused than anything with this, the faux outrage / faux victim-hood associated with poking fun at “lunks”, as if they are some downtrodden race of people who are getting discriminated against. Can we redraft the 14th Amendment to include lunks? Check with your local Congressman, anything is possible.
The TV advertising targets a set of behaviors which are greatly exaggerated for amusement and easy to refrain from engaging in - the best response is to not give PF your ten bucks and invest your time in causes with actual victims who need your help, the bros at the gym are going to be just fine.
On the scale of problems in the world, this one is pretty minor. But... your post seems really entitled and dismissive to me. You get that there are PFs where real people in the actual world who innocently paid their 10 bucks and went to work out have had a loud noise and a flashing light single them out for ridicule, right? But.. they'll be just fine? This experience was only "poking fun at them"? And you know that's how they feel about it how exactly? Because you say so? And while you're at it, you'll also give them a dismissive nickname and mock the idea that maybe this is a bad idea?
Here's an idea --- re-read what you wrote, substituting an offensive term for some other group for "lunks" and "bros" and see how it sounds to you. It's not a good look.
So being a lunk or a bro, which is entirely a choice based upon one’s behavior, is the same as being a racial or ethnic minority, handicapped, homosexual, etc? No, just stop with this, seriously, you are marginalizing real discrimination and offensiveness.
That's not at all how I read what that poster was saying.
You seem to be arguing under the assumption that other gyms are in fact full of people who choose to be lunks, so poking fun at said lunks is not that bad.
What I see posters here being offended by is that PF ads insinuated that other gyms are full of lunks (over-muscled stupid barely verbal bros who will scare you and judge you) and that is insulting and unfair to the real people at those gyms who are 99% of the time not at all like that. It's stereotyping people who go to other gyms in an insulting light, very much like other groups of people are stereotyped in an insulting and not accurate way. Of course there are degrees of the seriousness to stereotyping, and some stereotypes are more harmful and dangerous than others. But stereotyping people who workout at other gyms inaccurately as lunks, and then using the fear/distaste for lunks as a reason to go to PF is kind of *kitten*, don't you think? While it might differ in degree from other stereotypes, it's the same idea. I'm going to convince you that all people in this group have this negative trait and scare you into believing my group is better/safer/cleaner etc.8 -
I think that this whole thread shows that people are overly crazy about political correctness.
It's a friggin' funny commercial! (set of commercials)
Come on! If you lift you aren't really insulted. This is more pride disguised as offense....14 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »HoneyBadger155 wrote: »Yes, the marketing scheme is a marketing scheme, but obviously people pay for it, so I fail to see the issue. People who are serious about their health and fitness will likely out grow those gyms and move on to others.
It's insulting to anyone who doesn't fit their target. They can market to whoever they like without being insulting.
I would not be happy if Anytime Fitness (where I'm going) said "no fatties".
Other than that, more power to them.
For a non targeted person to feel insulted by a marketing campaign, in th context of a facility they will never enter, is about the oddest emotional reaction i can think of.
There's a rather obvious difference between saying something is insulting and saying you personally feel insulted by it.
I observe things that I believe are insulting (rude) all the time, of which I am not personally the target. For example, that YouTube video where some woman ranted about fat people. It did not insult me (I was not fat), but I thought it was insulting.
IMO, PF's marketing approach is bad, in that it relies on spreading false stereotypes about other gyms and the people who use them, or in particular people who exercise in certain ways. That's wrong--even if it is effective, in fact. especially if it is effective, as that means the advertising is having an influence--although I am not personally insulted by it (and in fact I would find it embarrassing to fall for PF's advertising).
Many people go to PF for reasons unrelated to the advertising. That's fine, what I find odd is the need to either defend PF's false claims or to argue that the advertising is totally fine, since it's okay to make fun of fit people and of people liking to exercise in certain ways (which it's just not, is sneering "eat a sandwich" at a thin woman okay because thinness is valued in many parts of our culture? is calling people dumb okay because they are also being called strong?). Beyond that, it's clearly not a very good message in a society in which most people are overweight and underactive to mock people (using extremely childish stereotypes) who are into exercising.8 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »HoneyBadger155 wrote: »Yes, the marketing scheme is a marketing scheme, but obviously people pay for it, so I fail to see the issue. People who are serious about their health and fitness will likely out grow those gyms and move on to others.
It's insulting to anyone who doesn't fit their target. They can market to whoever they like without being insulting.
I would not be happy if Anytime Fitness (where I'm going) said "no fatties".
Other than that, more power to them.
For a non targeted person to feel insulted by a marketing campaign, in th context of a facility they will never enter, is about the oddest emotional reaction i can think of.
Finding something objectively offensive seems odd to you?
^^This.
For example, I don't have to be fat in order to find 'fat jokes' offensive.
Exactly! And to take it further:
I don't have to be a racial minority to find racial stereotypes offensive.
I don't have to be gay to find homophobia offensive.
I don't have to be a woman to find sexual discrimination offensive.
The whole idea of stereotyping is dehumanizing. It is in and of itself offensive whether it is directed at you personally or not. That is the objection of many to Planet Fitness's approach.
This has absolutely nothing to do with faux outrage, victimization (I don't fit any of their stereotype that they characterize) or or whether I am targeted and insulted by them. I am neither. I still can find them offensive without being personally insulted, feeling like a victim or feeling outrage, faux or not.
I should have read through to the end, as you said what I was just trying to much more eloquently!5 -
Packerjohn wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »To anyone who may have been living in an advertising wasteland and has missed the fact that PF's marketing campaign negatively targets what they call "lunks" - this one's for you:https://youtu.be/yhDcjlYrwmQ
PS: No dog in this fight, either. I workout at home. Methinks their "Judgement Free Zone" campaign is merely a watered-down version of the same premise, though.
The narrative of all the PF ads I've seen posted on this thread (versus the ones I see on TV, which focus on low price and 24/7 hours) is
Prospective Customer: My experience or belief about gyms is horrible and absurd thing X. [Lunk alarm is part of anecdote/reminiscene of prospective customer]
PF employee trying to make a sale: That won't happen to you here. We're not a gym.
Not sure what TV you're seeing but all the national ads I've seen are the videos posted here which don't mention cost or hours. There may be some local ads that just focus on price and 24 hours (probably the case as not all PFs are 24/7). The national ads I've seen all start with examples of what PF considers examples stereotyped "lunk" behavior. Next, they show the perspective PF member in an almost confessional tone talking to the PF employee who looks at and talks to them like the employee is a grief counselor.
Even the copy on their main club pages don't mention cost or hours as their appeal. Here's an example, but it's the same on all Chicago clubs, and probably nationwide:
"We strive to create a workout environment where everyone feels accepted and respected. That’s why at Planet Fitness Chicago (Streeterville), IL we take care to make sure our club is clean and welcoming, our staff is friendly, and our certified trainers are ready to help. Whether you’re a first-time gym user or a fitness veteran, you’ll always have a home in our Judgement Free Zone™."
I checked the club I used to go to (which was completely clean and everyone was friendly, which has been my experience with all clubs), and by contrast it pushes it's convenience and location and hours and the availability of classes how that helps one stick to a workout routine.
I don't think the PF ad copy quoted above is bad in and of itself, of course, but it shows their push is about how it's supposedly non intimidating, not cost and hours. In conjunction with the ads slamming other gyms and gym-goers, I do think the intended effect is to make you think other gyms will make you feel disrespected and unwelcome, and that they will not be clean.
This was interesting to look at, since as mentioned above I've found it very strange that virtually every newbie gym goer posting about how PF is best because it's not mean and the equipment is always available also adds that it's clean, as if this was supposed to be some special thing vs. other gyms.4 -
annaskiski wrote: »I think that this whole thread shows that people are overly crazy about political correctness.
It's a friggin' funny commercial! (set of commercials)
Come on! If you lift you aren't really insulted. This is more pride disguised as offense....
I mean, I don't know if this is an entirely unpredictable take from someone who finds the ads funny.
If you dislike lifters enough to find the ads funny, it's not surprising any negative feeling they have about the ads will be attributed to "pride."
How could they be insulted, anyway? They're just "lunks," right?8 -
janejellyroll wrote: »annaskiski wrote: »I think that this whole thread shows that people are overly crazy about political correctness.
It's a friggin' funny commercial! (set of commercials)
Come on! If you lift you aren't really insulted. This is more pride disguised as offense....
I mean, I don't know if this is an entirely unpredictable take from someone who finds the ads funny.
If you dislike lifters enough to find the ads funny, it's not surprising any negative feeling they have about the ads will be attributed to "pride."
How could they be insulted, anyway? They're just "lunks," right?
I lift regularly. I find the ads hilarious...
(and I love lifters, and hang with them a lot).
But the ones I hang with are not 'offended' by PF commercials.
I have to say, if you are really offended by them, I am baffled....
4 -
The "lunks" I hang around are engineers who think its fun to heave iron at lunch.
The company gym is loud with grunting and clanging weights at lunch....and not one single one of them would be offended by being called a 'lunk'.4 -
annaskiski wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »annaskiski wrote: »I think that this whole thread shows that people are overly crazy about political correctness.
It's a friggin' funny commercial! (set of commercials)
Come on! If you lift you aren't really insulted. This is more pride disguised as offense....
I mean, I don't know if this is an entirely unpredictable take from someone who finds the ads funny.
If you dislike lifters enough to find the ads funny, it's not surprising any negative feeling they have about the ads will be attributed to "pride."
How could they be insulted, anyway? They're just "lunks," right?
I lift regularly. I find the ads hilarious...
(and I love lifters, and hang with them a lot).
But the ones I hang with are not 'offended' by PF commercials.
I have to say, if you are really offended by them, I am baffled....
Has anyone said they're offended? Something can be "insulting" without the insulted group feeling equivalent offense.
For context, people often make negative comments about groups of which I'm a part. These comments virtually never offend me because I don't consider them to be true. That doesn't make them any less insulting.
(I'm not offended by PF's ad, but I personally wouldn't want to join a gym that would kick me out for wearing something others considered "revealing." It's a gym, I want to wear tank tops, shorts, or leggings without having to worry about the prudery police. If someone is offended or upset by the sight of a woman's body in an athletic context, I consider that a problem for them and not something I should have to worry about . . . which is why I'd never join a PF while that rule was in place).5 -
annaskiski wrote: »The "lunks" I hang around are engineers who think its fun to heave iron at lunch.
The company gym is loud with grunting and clanging weights at lunch....and not one single one of them would be offended by being called a 'lunk'.
Is anyone in this thread offended? I'm not sure what the relevance of your co-workers is here, to be honest. I mean, good for them . . . they don't mind being called names. So what?7 -
I'm not offended being called skinny minny or being told I'm too thin and if someone told me to eat a sandwich I'd laugh, but that doesn't make it okay to make fun of people for being thin or to spread stereotypes about supposedly b-chy thin people.
I also wouldn't mind someone seeing me lifting and saying "lemurcat! you are becoming quite a lunkhead," since I'd know they didn't really mean it and I would know they were commenting on something I consider positive (and since the insulting aspect is muscle-y and dumb and I know I'm not thought to be either, really), but that doesn't mean that calling people big and dumb is okay or not extremely insulting in some contexts (in a more serious context I'd be way more offended by being seriously called dumb or slutty or uneducated (all related to the stereotypes PF is using) than being told I was fat).4 -
Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »
I belong to PF, a community rec center, and a workplace gym - I’ve been a gym rat my entire adult life so I’ve seen it all when it comes to gym cultures.
I’m offended by very little, including PF animosity. I’m more amused than anything with this, the faux outrage / faux victim-hood associated with poking fun at “lunks”, as if they are some downtrodden race of people who are getting discriminated against. Can we redraft the 14th Amendment to include lunks? Check with your local Congressman, anything is possible.
The TV advertising targets a set of behaviors which are greatly exaggerated for amusement and easy to refrain from engaging in - the best response is to not give PF your ten bucks and invest your time in causes with actual victims who need your help, the bros at the gym are going to be just fine.
On the scale of problems in the world, this one is pretty minor. But... your post seems really entitled and dismissive to me. You get that there are PFs where real people in the actual world who innocently paid their 10 bucks and went to work out have had a loud noise and a flashing light single them out for ridicule, right? But.. they'll be just fine? This experience was only "poking fun at them"? And you know that's how they feel about it how exactly? Because you say so? And while you're at it, you'll also give them a dismissive nickname and mock the idea that maybe this is a bad idea?
Here's an idea --- re-read what you wrote, substituting an offensive term for some other group for "lunks" and "bros" and see how it sounds to you. It's not a good look.
So being a lunk or a bro, which is entirely a choice based upon one’s behavior, is the same as being a racial or ethnic minority, handicapped, homosexual, etc? No, just stop with this, seriously, you are marginalizing real discrimination and offensiveness.
That's not at all how I read what that poster was saying.
You seem to be arguing under the assumption that other gyms are in fact full of people who choose to be lunks, so poking fun at said lunks is not that bad.
What I see posters here being offended by is that PF ads insinuated that other gyms are full of lunks (over-muscled stupid barely verbal bros who will scare you and judge you) and that is insulting and unfair to the real people at those gyms who are 99% of the time not at all like that. It's stereotyping people who go to other gyms in an insulting light, very much like other groups of people are stereotyped in an insulting and not accurate way. Of course there are degrees of the seriousness to stereotyping, and some stereotypes are more harmful and dangerous than others. But stereotyping people who workout at other gyms inaccurately as lunks, and then using the fear/distaste for lunks as a reason to go to PF is kind of *kitten*, don't you think? While it might differ in degree from other stereotypes, it's the same idea. I'm going to convince you that all people in this group have this negative trait and scare you into believing my group is better/safer/cleaner etc.
I was aware of these PF commercials years before I ever joined one and I didn’t associate any of the lunks’ behavior with myself because I didn’t engage in any of it, even though I was a member of a “judgmental gym”.
My takeaway from the commercials is that other gyms tend to tolerate lunkish behavior while PF doesn’t, not that every single person who belongs to a gym not operated by PF is a lunk.2 -
Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »Bry_Fitness70 wrote: »
I belong to PF, a community rec center, and a workplace gym - I’ve been a gym rat my entire adult life so I’ve seen it all when it comes to gym cultures.
I’m offended by very little, including PF animosity. I’m more amused than anything with this, the faux outrage / faux victim-hood associated with poking fun at “lunks”, as if they are some downtrodden race of people who are getting discriminated against. Can we redraft the 14th Amendment to include lunks? Check with your local Congressman, anything is possible.
The TV advertising targets a set of behaviors which are greatly exaggerated for amusement and easy to refrain from engaging in - the best response is to not give PF your ten bucks and invest your time in causes with actual victims who need your help, the bros at the gym are going to be just fine.
On the scale of problems in the world, this one is pretty minor. But... your post seems really entitled and dismissive to me. You get that there are PFs where real people in the actual world who innocently paid their 10 bucks and went to work out have had a loud noise and a flashing light single them out for ridicule, right? But.. they'll be just fine? This experience was only "poking fun at them"? And you know that's how they feel about it how exactly? Because you say so? And while you're at it, you'll also give them a dismissive nickname and mock the idea that maybe this is a bad idea?
Here's an idea --- re-read what you wrote, substituting an offensive term for some other group for "lunks" and "bros" and see how it sounds to you. It's not a good look.
So being a lunk or a bro, which is entirely a choice based upon one’s behavior, is the same as being a racial or ethnic minority, handicapped, homosexual, etc? No, just stop with this, seriously, you are marginalizing real discrimination and offensiveness.
IDK....like the @mreichard said, it may not be on the hot 10 of world problems but calling people "stupid" or "dumb" because of how they dress, train, or their choice of water bottle as part of your marketing campaign (and perpetuating a pretty bad stereotype) is....at least to me....pretty far out there.
Maybe that's just me.... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯8 -
I have to ask - what's the problem with big water containers? I've never noticed anyone carrying around a big jug of water, but I wouldn't have paid any attention before this thread. I had no idea it was a thing.4
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