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.
Thoughts on the “glamourizing/normalizing” obesity vs body positivity conversations
Replies
-
If by "frequently those who see themselves in a 'victim' category" you mean "everyone"...
People wanting their view of the world to be to be the "right one" is universal, no one group has a monopoly on that.
Does this mean you believe "everyone" sees themselves as victims? If yes, I completely disagree.
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.2 -
If by "frequently those who see themselves in a 'victim' category" you mean "everyone"...
People wanting their view of the world to be to be the "right one" is universal, no one group has a monopoly on that.
Does this mean you believe "everyone" sees themselves as victims? If yes, I completely disagree.
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Just an FYI, I think you keep inadvertently making formatting errors with the quotes.
That said, when someone says or does something that's racist, anti semitic, transphobic (gasp! there's that suffix), etc I'm not afraid to call the action what it is. And before someone does the, "but people who complain don't actually change anything!" I personally contributed to amending of multiple county and state anti-discrimination laws and have worked with multiple educational institutions to change various policies. I certainly don't expect that people with agree with each other on everything and I don't expect to be able to convince people that what they're saying or doing is harmful. That said, when someone's actions are dehumanising, dangerous, and/or discriminatory I am not just going to roll over and agree if I have the energy and resources to do something about it.
It's funny (and sad), so many people who prescribe to the very faulty "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality get very offended people do just that.15 -
@aokoye is awesome. 🙂6
-
If by "frequently those who see themselves in a 'victim' category" you mean "everyone"...
People wanting their view of the world to be to be the "right one" is universal, no one group has a monopoly on that.
Does this mean you believe "everyone" sees themselves as victims? If yes, I completely disagree.
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Just an FYI, I think you keep inadvertently making formatting errors with the quotes.
That said, when someone says or does something that's racist, anti semitic, transphobic (gasp! there's that suffix), etc I'm not afraid to call the action what it is. And before someone does the, "but people who complain don't actually change anything!" I personally contributed to amending of multiple county and state anti-discrimination laws and have worked with multiple educational institutions to change various policies. I certainly don't expect that people with agree with each other on everything and I don't expect to be able to convince people that what they're saying or doing is harmful. That said, when someone's actions are dehumanising, dangerous, and/or discriminatory I am not just going to roll over and agree if I have the energy and resources to do something about it.
It's funny (and sad), so many people who prescribe to the very faulty "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality get very offended people do just that.
I had a discussion on a certain political forum once about just that and..I'm still at a loss for words how to describe it lol.
That said, there's a distinct difference between people who complain, and then DO, and people who simply complain. You are very clearly a doer, others are content (for lack of a better word atm) to simply sit back and complain never developing or following a course of action.
I don't really want to get into all the various ways that people short change each other and themselves (I've been guilty of it too) because, while it could easily fit into the scope of this topic, I'm not sure hammering out text for an hour would actually accomplish a lot here, other than folks who read here getting to know each other a bit better.
That's not a bad thing by the way...I've been losing my stomach for long debates simply because it's so impersonal online..it's harder to contribute to the discussion given that.
3 -
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Most of us do I think
It's very difficult online, and in real life at times, to separate people who are passionate about their beliefs, and people who have passion without any type of discernment. Ad hom attackers and such.
One of my best online experiences was a running, almost year long debate about various topics and the topics points segued into. This gentleman was literally the polar opposite of me in lifestyle and belief systems. We were always "yelling" at each other, but never denigrating or anything else negative, and at the end of the day we joked everything off and caught up later.
What was really telling were the odd posts from other forum members, directed at each of us, that were outright attacks, some very creative lol, but always negative, or outright mean. Until mods put a stop to it anyway.
My point behind sharing that is that we developed a very real online friendship and each of our respective stereotypes of the others various quirks were broken down. It took a lot of work, patience and time.
That work, patience and time is what's required here, or any platform where values and long held beliefs are being challenged.
Yes, there are those out there who simply hit and run - most folks in my experience though, will respond in kind. Be civil, explain thoroughly, make allowances for humanities quirks and that individuals life experiences and who knows? Might make a friend.8 -
If by "frequently those who see themselves in a 'victim' category" you mean "everyone"...
People wanting their view of the world to be to be the "right one" is universal, no one group has a monopoly on that.
Does this mean you believe "everyone" sees themselves as victims? If yes, I completely disagree.
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Just an FYI, I think you keep inadvertently making formatting errors with the quotes.
That said, when someone says or does something that's racist, anti semitic, transphobic (gasp! there's that suffix), etc I'm not afraid to call the action what it is. And before someone does the, "but people who complain don't actually change anything!" I personally contributed to amending of multiple county and state anti-discrimination laws and have worked with multiple educational institutions to change various policies. I certainly don't expect that people with agree with each other on everything and I don't expect to be able to convince people that what they're saying or doing is harmful. That said, when someone's actions are dehumanising, dangerous, and/or discriminatory I am not just going to roll over and agree if I have the energy and resources to do something about it.
It's funny (and sad), so many people who prescribe to the very faulty "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality get very offended people do just that.
I'll let @7elizamae speak for herself, but the point I was trying to make is just because I disagree with someone, doesn't mean I'm bullying or dehumanizing them. A poster was called out for bullying earlier in the thread, and from my POV he was just offering his opinion.
Carolyn Myss's point is that when people are overly wrapped up in the (admittedly terrible) things that happen to them, they can fall prey to what she calls woundology, which may also be thought of as victimhood.9 -
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Most of us do I think
It's very difficult online, and in real life at times, to separate people who are passionate about their beliefs, and people who have passion without any type of discernment. Ad hom attackers and such.
One of my best online experiences was a running, almost year long debate about various topics and the topics points segued into. This gentleman was literally the polar opposite of me in lifestyle and belief systems. We were always "yelling" at each other, but never denigrating or anything else negative, and at the end of the day we joked everything off and caught up later.
What was really telling were the odd posts from other forum members, directed at each of us, that were outright attacks, some very creative lol, but always negative, or outright mean. Until mods put a stop to it anyway.
My point behind sharing that is that we developed a very real online friendship and each of our respective stereotypes of the others various quirks were broken down. It took a lot of work, patience and time.
That work, patience and time is what's required here, or any platform where values and long held beliefs are being challenged.
Yes, there are those out there who simply hit and run - most folks in my experience though, will respond in kind. Be civil, explain thoroughly, make allowances for humanities quirks and that individuals life experiences and who knows? Might make a friend.
I don't believe it's important what you believe. The importance lies in why you believe it. What data are you reviewing? What experiences have you had? What is your immediate and long term motivation?
One of my favorite relationships was that of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. While both held very opposing views of the law, they used their passion to debate and refine their ideas for truth. This in turn evolved into a wonderful friendship.
All too often in online discussions it ends up being not a debate with another poster, but a debate between yourself and some caricature you've constructed based upon what you believe the other believes.6 -
Of course what you believe is important. As is the why of it. Where the debates and conversations come in is either refining and sharpening your own understanding of your beliefs, or (if completely honest with yourself/myself) getting rid of those beliefs.
I don't believe it's important what you believe. The importance lies in why you believe it. What data are you reviewing? What experiences have you had? What is your immediate and long term motivation?
One of my favorite bible verses is "Iron sharpens iron". It's a direct reference to what I typed above, and a wonderful tool for getting rid of or avoiding that awful confirmation bias we see so much of today. It requires that personal honesty though.
I think of McCain and Kennedy quite often - I don't want to digress, but yes, a friendship that grows out of that kind of interaction can be deep indeed.One of my favorite relationships was that of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. While both held very opposing views of the law, they used their passion to debate and refine their ideas for truth. This in turn evolved into a wonderful friendship.
Wouldn't you classify that as a stereotype?All too often in online discussions it ends up being not a debate with another poster, but a debate between yourself and some caricature you've constructed based upon what you believe the other believes.4 -
Of course what you believe is important. As is the why of it. Where the debates and conversations come in is either refining and sharpening your own understanding of your beliefs, or (if completely honest with yourself/myself) getting rid of those beliefs.
I don't believe it's important what you believe. The importance lies in why you believe it. What data are you reviewing? What experiences have you had? What is your immediate and long term motivation?
One of my favorite bible verses is "Iron sharpens iron". It's a direct reference to what I typed above, and a wonderful tool for getting rid of or avoiding that awful confirmation bias we see so much of today. It requires that personal honesty though.
I think of McCain and Kennedy quite often - I don't want to digress, but yes, a friendship that grows out of that kind of interaction can be deep indeed.One of my favorite relationships was that of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. While both held very opposing views of the law, they used their passion to debate and refine their ideas for truth. This in turn evolved into a wonderful friendship.
Wouldn't you classify that as a stereotype?All too often in online discussions it ends up being not a debate with another poster, but a debate between yourself and some caricature you've constructed based upon what you believe the other believes.
I should clarify and "more" important or carrying degree of importance.
Proverbs 27:17 - one of my favorite passages as well, but this requires like minded truth seekers who are willing to challenge their bias.
Stereotype fits, but in my mind this is more of a strawman construction as there is no foundation of transfered from one to another. This is a purposeful construction to cast the opposition as evil and thereby maintaining the illusion that the constructor is good.
Jonathan Haidt discussed much of this is a talk at Penn State - the core concept directly applies to this debate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5IGyHNvr7E 1 -
Of course what you believe is important. As is the why of it. Where the debates and conversations come in is either refining and sharpening your own understanding of your beliefs, or (if completely honest with yourself/myself) getting rid of those beliefs.
I don't believe it's important what you believe. The importance lies in why you believe it. What data are you reviewing? What experiences have you had? What is your immediate and long term motivation?
One of my favorite bible verses is "Iron sharpens iron". It's a direct reference to what I typed above, and a wonderful tool for getting rid of or avoiding that awful confirmation bias we see so much of today. It requires that personal honesty though.
I think of McCain and Kennedy quite often - I don't want to digress, but yes, a friendship that grows out of that kind of interaction can be deep indeed.One of my favorite relationships was that of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. While both held very opposing views of the law, they used their passion to debate and refine their ideas for truth. This in turn evolved into a wonderful friendship.
Wouldn't you classify that as a stereotype?All too often in online discussions it ends up being not a debate with another poster, but a debate between yourself and some caricature you've constructed based upon what you believe the other believes.
I should clarify and "more" important or carrying degree of importance.
Proverbs 27:17 - one of my favorite passages as well, but this requires like minded truth seekers who are willing to challenge their bias.
Stereotype fits, but in my mind this is more of a strawman construction as there is no foundation of transfered from one to another. This is a purposeful construction to cast the opposition as evil and thereby maintaining the illusion that the constructor is good.
Jonathan Haidt discussed much of this is a talk at Penn State - the core concept directly applies to this debate:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5IGyHNvr7E
Thanks for the video - I'll check that out tonight.
Regarding the bold, I absolutely agree that some do exactly that, but to my point about getting to actually know the person you're debating, that's not what I do.
I will admit, in the interest of full transparency and disclosure, that I have practiced that tactic. Years in the past, and much to my great shame.
Not everyone who addresses the image in their own mind of the person they are speaking with has ill intent at heart. That's a tough one to parse, but it's true. The difficult part is understanding for oneself that "I" am either a part of, or all of the issue.
Again though, to my earlier point, it took a lot of work and patience for that to be brought to light, so I, in turn, try to be patient when I run into that these days.2 -
Of course what you believe is important. As is the why of it. Where the debates and conversations come in is either refining and sharpening your own understanding of your beliefs, or (if completely honest with yourself/myself) getting rid of those beliefs.
I don't believe it's important what you believe. The importance lies in why you believe it. What data are you reviewing? What experiences have you had? What is your immediate and long term motivation?
One of my favorite bible verses is "Iron sharpens iron". It's a direct reference to what I typed above, and a wonderful tool for getting rid of or avoiding that awful confirmation bias we see so much of today. It requires that personal honesty though.
I think of McCain and Kennedy quite often - I don't want to digress, but yes, a friendship that grows out of that kind of interaction can be deep indeed.One of my favorite relationships was that of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. While both held very opposing views of the law, they used their passion to debate and refine their ideas for truth. This in turn evolved into a wonderful friendship.
Wouldn't you classify that as a stereotype?All too often in online discussions it ends up being not a debate with another poster, but a debate between yourself and some caricature you've constructed based upon what you believe the other believes.
I should clarify and "more" important or carrying degree of importance.
Proverbs 27:17 - one of my favorite passages as well, but this requires like minded truth seekers who are willing to challenge their bias.
Stereotype fits, but in my mind this is more of a strawman construction as there is no foundation of transferred from one to another. This is a purposeful construction to cast the opposition as evil and thereby maintaining the illusion that the constructor is good.
Jonathan Haidt discussed much of this is a talk at Penn State - the core concept directly applies to this debate:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5IGyHNvr7E
Thanks for the video - I'll check that out tonight.
Regarding the bold, I absolutely agree that some do exactly that, but to my point about getting to actually know the person you're debating, that's not what I do.
I will admit, in the interest of full transparency and disclosure, that I have practiced that tactic. Years in the past, and much to my great shame.
Not everyone who addresses the image in their own mind of the person they are speaking with has ill intent at heart. That's a tough one to parse, but it's true. The difficult part is understanding for oneself that "I" am either a part of, or all of the issue.
Again though, to my earlier point, it took a lot of work and patience for that to be brought to light, so I, in turn, try to be patient when I run into that these days.
I am guilty of the same sin. We all do at some point and will do in the future. It returns to the fundamental truth that man is not inherently good or evil, but has the potential to do good and evil.
This is why it is important to stress the friendship of those on opposing sides - it represents an ideal to strive towards given the ultimate goals are mutual. Healthy debate evolves from a desire to understand opposing viewpoints.
I owe much of this to my secondary school history teacher and debate coach who started each session with a quote:
"He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion." John Stuart Mill5 -
Of course what you believe is important. As is the why of it. Where the debates and conversations come in is either refining and sharpening your own understanding of your beliefs, or (if completely honest with yourself/myself) getting rid of those beliefs.
I don't believe it's important what you believe. The importance lies in why you believe it. What data are you reviewing? What experiences have you had? What is your immediate and long term motivation?
One of my favorite bible verses is "Iron sharpens iron". It's a direct reference to what I typed above, and a wonderful tool for getting rid of or avoiding that awful confirmation bias we see so much of today. It requires that personal honesty though.
I think of McCain and Kennedy quite often - I don't want to digress, but yes, a friendship that grows out of that kind of interaction can be deep indeed.One of my favorite relationships was that of Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia. While both held very opposing views of the law, they used their passion to debate and refine their ideas for truth. This in turn evolved into a wonderful friendship.
Wouldn't you classify that as a stereotype?All too often in online discussions it ends up being not a debate with another poster, but a debate between yourself and some caricature you've constructed based upon what you believe the other believes.
I should clarify and "more" important or carrying degree of importance.
Proverbs 27:17 - one of my favorite passages as well, but this requires like minded truth seekers who are willing to challenge their bias.
Stereotype fits, but in my mind this is more of a strawman construction as there is no foundation of transferred from one to another. This is a purposeful construction to cast the opposition as evil and thereby maintaining the illusion that the constructor is good.
Jonathan Haidt discussed much of this is a talk at Penn State - the core concept directly applies to this debate:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5IGyHNvr7E
Thanks for the video - I'll check that out tonight.
Regarding the bold, I absolutely agree that some do exactly that, but to my point about getting to actually know the person you're debating, that's not what I do.
I will admit, in the interest of full transparency and disclosure, that I have practiced that tactic. Years in the past, and much to my great shame.
Not everyone who addresses the image in their own mind of the person they are speaking with has ill intent at heart. That's a tough one to parse, but it's true. The difficult part is understanding for oneself that "I" am either a part of, or all of the issue.
Again though, to my earlier point, it took a lot of work and patience for that to be brought to light, so I, in turn, try to be patient when I run into that these days.
I am guilty of the same sin. We all do at some point and will do in the future. It returns to the fundamental truth that man is not inherently good or evil, but has the potential to do good and evil.
This is why it is important to stress the friendship of those on opposing sides - it represents an ideal to strive towards given the ultimate goals are mutual. Healthy debate evolves from a desire to understand opposing viewpoints.
I owe much of this to my secondary school history teacher and debate coach who started each session with a quote:
"He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion." John Stuart Mill
I like that, quite a bit.
I agree about striving for ideals as long as those ideals are for the betterment of both sides.
If only it were as easy as this chat eh?
1 -
In the US, you don't pay higher health insurance premiums based on BMI, or any other health condition. The only things that affect health insurance premiums is age and if you are a smoker.
I don't pay a penalty for my health insurance, but I definitely do for my life insurance. They apply a fee labelled FT (I assume for Fat Tax) because I weigh more than 154 lbs. I pay an extra $360 per year because of it. Any woman who weighs more than 154 lbs (regardless of height) pays the FT with this particular company. I think men are allowed 174 lbs.
0 -
If by "frequently those who see themselves in a 'victim' category" you mean "everyone"...
People wanting their view of the world to be to be the "right one" is universal, no one group has a monopoly on that.
Does this mean you believe "everyone" sees themselves as victims? If yes, I completely disagree.
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Just an FYI, I think you keep inadvertently making formatting errors with the quotes.
That said, when someone says or does something that's racist, anti semitic, transphobic (gasp! there's that suffix), etc I'm not afraid to call the action what it is. And before someone does the, "but people who complain don't actually change anything!" I personally contributed to amending of multiple county and state anti-discrimination laws and have worked with multiple educational institutions to change various policies. I certainly don't expect that people with agree with each other on everything and I don't expect to be able to convince people that what they're saying or doing is harmful. That said, when someone's actions are dehumanising, dangerous, and/or discriminatory I am not just going to roll over and agree if I have the energy and resources to do something about it.
It's funny (and sad), so many people who prescribe to the very faulty "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality get very offended people do just that.
I had a discussion on a certain political forum once about just that and..I'm still at a loss for words how to describe it lol.
That said, there's a distinct difference between people who complain, and then DO, and people who simply complain. You are very clearly a doer, others are content (for lack of a better word atm) to simply sit back and complain never developing or following a course of action.
I don't really want to get into all the various ways that people short change each other and themselves (I've been guilty of it too) because, while it could easily fit into the scope of this topic, I'm not sure hammering out text for an hour would actually accomplish a lot here, other than folks who read here getting to know each other a bit better.
That's not a bad thing by the way...I've been losing my stomach for long debates simply because it's so impersonal online..it's harder to contribute to the discussion given that.
Yeah I typically prefer debates/heated discussions on other forums and in person honestly. There's something about MFP that really doesn't lend itself well to these things as opposed to some (key word "some") other online forums. Of course it's much better in person because of issues that come with asynchronous communication and what not.
I think the other thing that's hard is that while yes, I have explained that I am a doer when possible, there's no way for anyone here to know that. We all unconsciously make a boat load of assumptions about each other - some positive, some negative. That, of course, happens offline as well, but I think it can sometimes be easier for the other person to clear up those assumptions in person. The opposite can be true as well of course - time allows for one to really craft what they have to say (I can give examples from my life).3 -
kshama2001 wrote: »
If by "frequently those who see themselves in a 'victim' category" you mean "everyone"...
People wanting their view of the world to be to be the "right one" is universal, no one group has a monopoly on that.
Does this mean you believe "everyone" sees themselves as victims? If yes, I completely disagree.
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Just an FYI, I think you keep inadvertently making formatting errors with the quotes.
That said, when someone says or does something that's racist, anti semitic, transphobic (gasp! there's that suffix), etc I'm not afraid to call the action what it is. And before someone does the, "but people who complain don't actually change anything!" I personally contributed to amending of multiple county and state anti-discrimination laws and have worked with multiple educational institutions to change various policies. I certainly don't expect that people with agree with each other on everything and I don't expect to be able to convince people that what they're saying or doing is harmful. That said, when someone's actions are dehumanising, dangerous, and/or discriminatory I am not just going to roll over and agree if I have the energy and resources to do something about it.
It's funny (and sad), so many people who prescribe to the very faulty "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality get very offended people do just that.
I'll let @7elizamae speak for herself, but the point I was trying to make is just because I disagree with someone, doesn't mean I'm bullying or dehumanizing them. A poster was called out for bullying earlier in the thread, and from my POV he was just offering his opinion.
Carolyn Myss's point is that when people are overly wrapped up in the (admittedly terrible) things that happen to them, they can fall prey to what she calls woundology, which may also be thought of as victimhood.
I think you and I probably have very different definitions of what it means to be a victim, which is ok. Putting that aside, I was by no means saying that disagreement automatically equals bullying or dehumanising someone. I can easily think of cases where disagreeing about something can be dehumanising or an act of bullying, but that's not always the case. I don't even know if it's often the case.
edit: Looking at the post in question again, it isn't exactly clear if @7elizamae was responding to my post given the formatting issues.2 -
If by "frequently those who see themselves in a 'victim' category" you mean "everyone"...
People wanting their view of the world to be to be the "right one" is universal, no one group has a monopoly on that.
Does this mean you believe "everyone" sees themselves as victims? If yes, I completely disagree.
And plenty of people are comfortable with others who have different views. I believe my view is correct, but I don't need or expect everyone to agree. And I don't label those who disagree with me as bigots or haters or phobics.
Just an FYI, I think you keep inadvertently making formatting errors with the quotes.
That said, when someone says or does something that's racist, anti semitic, transphobic (gasp! there's that suffix), etc I'm not afraid to call the action what it is. And before someone does the, "but people who complain don't actually change anything!" I personally contributed to amending of multiple county and state anti-discrimination laws and have worked with multiple educational institutions to change various policies. I certainly don't expect that people with agree with each other on everything and I don't expect to be able to convince people that what they're saying or doing is harmful. That said, when someone's actions are dehumanising, dangerous, and/or discriminatory I am not just going to roll over and agree if I have the energy and resources to do something about it.
It's funny (and sad), so many people who prescribe to the very faulty "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" mentality get very offended people do just that.
I had a discussion on a certain political forum once about just that and..I'm still at a loss for words how to describe it lol.
That said, there's a distinct difference between people who complain, and then DO, and people who simply complain. You are very clearly a doer, others are content (for lack of a better word atm) to simply sit back and complain never developing or following a course of action.
I don't really want to get into all the various ways that people short change each other and themselves (I've been guilty of it too) because, while it could easily fit into the scope of this topic, I'm not sure hammering out text for an hour would actually accomplish a lot here, other than folks who read here getting to know each other a bit better.
That's not a bad thing by the way...I've been losing my stomach for long debates simply because it's so impersonal online..it's harder to contribute to the discussion given that.
Yeah I typically prefer debates/heated discussions on other forums and in person honestly. There's something about MFP that really doesn't lend itself well to these things as opposed to some (key word "some") other online forums. Of course it's much better in person because of issues that come with asynchronous communication and what not.
I think the other thing that's hard is that while yes, I have explained that I am a doer when possible, there's no way for anyone here to know that. We all unconsciously make a boat load of assumptions about each other - some positive, some negative. That, of course, happens offline as well, but I think it can sometimes be easier for the other person to clear up those assumptions in person. The opposite can be true as well of course - time allows for one to really craft what they have to say (I can give examples from my life).
That's true of course, yet with that said I believe it's safer to take some people at their word. You've always been, as long as I've been reading here at least, very consistent. That lends credibility as far as I'm concerned. 4 -
OP has a point. My state just passed a law that makes obese people a protected class.
Meanwhile 75% of healthcare spending is now on preventable diseases directly resulting from obesity.1 -
jhanleybrown wrote: »OP has a point. My state just passed a law that makes obese people a protected class.
Meanwhile 75% of healthcare spending is now on preventable diseases directly resulting from obesity.
A "protected class" means you can't discriminate against them. If anything, I think that proves that obese people are often discriminated against and looked down on, rather than glamorized or accepted as normal.
I doubt allowing companies to not hire obese people will help the obesity crisis, especially since obesity levels are often higher in low income areas. This comes back around to the idea that punishing obese people will somehow motivate them to lose weight. But as has been stated many times here, low self esteem, embarrassment, and denial seem to be powerful factors in escalating obesity, not preventing it.
It would be great to see a clear and concise national effort at education (including education of healthcare pros) and support, before we resign ourselves to shunning.
Having said that, the ridiculous system we have in the US where employers are tasked with providing their employees health insurance corners us into all sorts of conflicts of interest. But that's a whole other debate thread...10 -
I don't pay a penalty for my health insurance, but I definitely do for my life insurance. They apply a fee labelled FT (I assume for Fat Tax) because I weigh more than 154 lbs. I pay an extra $360 per year because of it. Any woman who weighs more than 154 lbs (regardless of height) pays the FT with this particular company. I think men are allowed 174 lbs.
What the hell is this? It's only based on weight and nothing else? What if you're a 5'10" female at 154? Much different than a 5'0" female at 154lbs. 154 and muscular is much different than 154 and mostly fat. In a sense I can understand higher risk clients paying a higher premium, but it has to be based on actual quantifiable measures from health professionals, or a habit like smoking, not an arbitrary number on the scale. I'm surprised there haven't been lawsuits against companies with policies like this.
2 -
[quote="ellie1
What the hell is this? It's only based on weight and nothing else? What if you're a 5'10" female at 154? Much different than a 5'0" female at 154lbs. 154 and muscular is much different than 154 and mostly fat. In a sense I can understand higher risk clients paying a higher premium, but it has to be based on actual quantifiable measures from health professionals, or a habit like smoking, not an arbitrary number on the scale. I'm surprised there haven't been lawsuits against companies with policies like this.
[/quote]
It is ridiculous to be sure, but who could actually afford to fight such a thing? Insurance companies can afford to hire the best lawyers. It would have to come down to a class action suit and it seems those are largely symbolic even if there is a victory.
At this point, it is doubtful I will have my FT lifted. Seasonal affective disorder along with major changes at work lead to a mini-breakdown and some major binge eating. I gained 20 lbs in three weeks. Today, I feel I may have (hope I have) turned the corner to return to my prior mindset. Trying my best to get back to my previous eating plan and shake 30 lbs before January 1st.
5 -
"ellie1 wrote:What the hell is this? It's only based on weight and nothing else? What if you're a 5'10" female at 154? Much different than a 5'0" female at 154lbs. 154 and muscular is much different than 154 and mostly fat. In a sense I can understand higher risk clients paying a higher premium, but it has to be based on actual quantifiable measures from health professionals, or a habit like smoking, not an arbitrary number on the scale. I'm surprised there haven't been lawsuits against companies with policies like this.
It is ridiculous to be sure, but who could actually afford to fight such a thing? Insurance companies can afford to hire the best lawyers. It would have to come down to a class action suit and it seems those are largely symbolic even if there is a victory.
At this point, it is doubtful I will have my FT lifted. Seasonal affective disorder along with major changes at work lead to a mini-breakdown and some major binge eating. I gained 20 lbs in three weeks. Today, I feel I may have (hope I have) turned the corner to return to my prior mindset. Trying my best to get back to my previous eating plan and shake 30 lbs before January 1st.
What provider is this? Have you called and asked what the acronym stands for?1 -
The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.0
-
This is such an emotive and contentious topic.
I was an obese child and teenager and was bullied horribly for it - people always had something to say about how grotesque I looked and about what I was eating/drinking/doing or not doing.
In my late teens and early twenties I had disordered eating patterns (probably due to the bullying) and was grossly underweight, yet everyone congratulated me on how thin I was. No one cared that I cut out entire food groups (I was morbidly afraid of potatoes and bread) and was obsessive about food and exercise.
These experiences have led me to believe we as a society value aesthetics over health. I would propose that we should focus not on a person's body shape or size, but on how we can help each person achieve a healthy lifestyle. Telling someone "you're too fat" or "you're so thin now" doesn't give them anything constructive to go on, all it does is confirm to them that how they look takes precedence over their health. I would imagine that anorexia and other eating disorders must have a similar impact on health systems to obesity, alongside other lifestyle induced issues such as drinking and smoking related diseases.
Perhaps it would be better if we focused on giving people factual information and letting them make a choice without judgement? I.e. on mfp we all know how CICO works and choose to implement it in order to manipulate our weight, despite the whole host of other choices available to us.
Of course this is anecdotal and based on my own perceptions, so I appreciate others may not feel the same.11 -
The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.
This is the thing I don't understand about being troubled by one's life insurance in this way: If it's not the lowest price plan that offers adequate coverage, but one that doesn't do the FT thing is adequate and cheaper, it would make sense to buy the competitor (and send the CEO of the original insurance company a polite letter, preferably the old-fashioned paper kind, explaining why weight penalities with no other dimensions are objectively dumb). If it is the lowest-priced adequate plan, how much does it really matter how they structure the baling wire and bubble gum that holds the plan together?
I agree the policy is dumb as stated.1 -
The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.
This is the thing I don't understand about being troubled by one's life insurance in this way: If it's not the lowest price plan that offers adequate coverage, but one that doesn't do the FT thing is adequate and cheaper, it would make sense to buy the competitor (and send the CEO of the original insurance company a polite letter, preferably the old-fashioned paper kind, explaining why weight penalities with no other dimensions are objectively dumb). If it is the lowest-priced adequate plan, how much does it really matter how they structure the baling wire and bubble gum that holds the plan together?
I agree the policy is dumb as stated.
From an economic stand point, I don't think it is so clear they would be objectively dumb. Sure, it is possible for BMI to not track adiposity, but even right at that spot, that doesn't mean BMI isn't predicting health issues regardless of adiposity. Sleep obstruction and knee injury risks are just as bad for people at high BMI's, regardless of their composition.
Though, even then, if composition is the health risk predictor, it could be the case that it would not be worth the insurance company to do the work to review deeper risks to offer a differential rate. Few people with a high BMI are the kinds that have a good composition. The cost of testing or even the cost of having a system that can verify testing might not be worth it to either the insurer or the insured.
And yes, the person talk about weight, without BMI / height involved. I don't know the statistics there, but it might be the case that height offers certain risks so that even being a high weight but tall is still a risk.2 -
The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.
In addition to age and health, major factors in the cost of life insurance are the amount of the benefit (payout if you die) and whether it is term insurance or whole life. Without knowing these details, it's absurd to try to do comparisons.0 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.
This is the thing I don't understand about being troubled by one's life insurance in this way: If it's not the lowest price plan that offers adequate coverage, but one that doesn't do the FT thing is adequate and cheaper, it would make sense to buy the competitor (and send the CEO of the original insurance company a polite letter, preferably the old-fashioned paper kind, explaining why weight penalities with no other dimensions are objectively dumb). If it is the lowest-priced adequate plan, how much does it really matter how they structure the baling wire and bubble gum that holds the plan together?
I agree the policy is dumb as stated.
From an economic stand point, I don't think it is so clear they would be objectively dumb. Sure, it is possible for BMI to not track adiposity, but even right at that spot, that doesn't mean BMI isn't predicting health issues regardless of adiposity. Sleep obstruction and knee injury risks are just as bad for people at high BMI's, regardless of their composition.
Though, even then, if composition is the health risk predictor, it could be the case that it would not be worth the insurance company to do the work to review deeper risks to offer a differential rate. Few people with a high BMI are the kinds that have a good composition. The cost of testing or even the cost of having a system that can verify testing might not be worth it to either the insurer or the insured.
And yes, the person talk about weight, without BMI / height involved. I don't know the statistics there, but it might be the case that height offers certain risks so that even being a high weight but tall is still a risk.
I'm not sure BMI would be objectively dumb. Not great, but I still say absolute weight is objectively dumb, especially in the context I cited: Pricing your product above the competition as a result.
PP said the weight threshold was 154 for women. At 5'7" - not super tall for a woman - 154 is normal BMI. And 174 for men, which is normal BMI at 5'11".0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.
In addition to age and health, major factors in the cost of life insurance are the amount of the benefit (payout if you die) and whether it is term insurance or whole life. Without knowing these details, it's absurd to try to do comparisons.
Several years ago, my State Farm agent suggested I apply for life insurance so I'd get a mutli-policy discount for my vehicle, so agreed. It was a whole life policy, and even though I had no existing health issues other than my weight, I was denied coverage because I did not meet requirements of the weight table.
Granted, its been something like 14 years ago, so the policy may have changed; I've lost 90 lbs in the meantime but haven't tried again as I have a very good term life policy through my employer that remains mine even if I leave the company, and I'm perfectly happy with that - I have no significant other and no children and thus no beneficiaries that need to be cared for, and my policy is more than adequate to bury me and close out my estate, so I've never seen the need for a whole life policy.0 -
bmeadows380 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.
In addition to age and health, major factors in the cost of life insurance are the amount of the benefit (payout if you die) and whether it is term insurance or whole life. Without knowing these details, it's absurd to try to do comparisons.
Several years ago, my State Farm agent suggested I apply for life insurance so I'd get a mutli-policy discount for my vehicle, so agreed. It was a whole life policy, and even though I had no existing health issues other than my weight, I was denied coverage because I did not meet requirements of the weight table.
Granted, its been something like 14 years ago, so the policy may have changed; I've lost 90 lbs in the meantime but haven't tried again as I have a very good term life policy through my employer that remains mine even if I leave the company, and I'm perfectly happy with that - I have no significant other and no children and thus no beneficiaries that need to be cared for, and my policy is more than adequate to bury me and close out my estate, so I've never seen the need for a whole life policy.
Congrats on the weight loss.
You're lucky you were denied a whole life policy. One of the worst financial products out there from a consumer point of view.5 -
bmeadows380 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »The life insurance thing... did you shop around? The amount you have tacked on for the "FT" whatever that is, that's more than my entire yearly premium alone. Granted I'm young and had all good markers on my health exam.
In addition to age and health, major factors in the cost of life insurance are the amount of the benefit (payout if you die) and whether it is term insurance or whole life. Without knowing these details, it's absurd to try to do comparisons.
Several years ago, my State Farm agent suggested I apply for life insurance so I'd get a mutli-policy discount for my vehicle, so agreed. It was a whole life policy, and even though I had no existing health issues other than my weight, I was denied coverage because I did not meet requirements of the weight table.
Granted, its been something like 14 years ago, so the policy may have changed; I've lost 90 lbs in the meantime but haven't tried again as I have a very good term life policy through my employer that remains mine even if I leave the company, and I'm perfectly happy with that - I have no significant other and no children and thus no beneficiaries that need to be cared for, and my policy is more than adequate to bury me and close out my estate, so I've never seen the need for a whole life policy.
The fact that you don't feel the need for a whole life policy in no way eliminates the possibility that the person who stated what they were paying for an unspecified policy and the person who questioned whether that was an excessive amount were talking about different kinds of policy or policies with different benefits (payouts).0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions