Ugh, The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance

But, again, you can't pick out that person who is fat because of a medical problem by looking at them. It is certainly true that a small number of disabled people are disabled because they made bad choices. You can even debate as to blame vs blamelessness in degrees. I have a HS classmate who (not in HS, as an adult) dove headfirst into four-foot water and was paralyzed from the neck down. There were signs everywhere warning not to dive head first and of the danger, but this guy was not one to follow rules. He was known in elementary school for beating other kids up pretty randomly, and he eventually was kicked out of our HS for bullying. The residential HS he subsequently attended threw him out for pouring a pot of hot coffee on his roommate as a prank. Now he is obviously disabled and uses a power wheelchair with special controls to get around. He's disabled, but he made the choice just as certainly--MORE certainly--than any fat person. He's not alone. So shall we not accept disabled people because you can't tell the ones who got that way blamelessly from the ones who got there by making bad choices? Are you saying that the "percentage" of people who made bad choices matters? It's okay to discriminate against a smaller number of people?

I walk with crutches. Should I simply be denied the things I can't get to because you can't tell by looking at me WHY I need crutches? Should I be denied a job as a computer programmer because a company just considers disabled people "gross?" Why should a fat person be denied the same job because you don't accept his/her "fatness?" I also have cancer. This could have a direct affect on a company that hires me's health plan. Should they be allowed to deny me a job because I have cancer?

If you REALLY believe that you should ONLY protect from discrimination things that are NOT a choice EVER, gender, race and national origin should be protected. Religion is a CHOICE. You CAN change your religion, even if you don't choose to. Disability is sometimes a choice as well. Perhaps a better measure is the "essential functions of the job" rule. If I can perform the "essential functions of the job" then my personal traits AND choices are not an employer's business. You don't have to "accept" me as a person, but you can't decide that you don't like my personal choices and so not hire, rent, or sell to me.

You are implying incorrectly that discrimination is entirely based on first impressions, no the whiney people that are complaining they are discriminated against because they are fat are usually disregarded after being questioned at least when I am looking to hire someone. Again, I draw back to my pussification of America statement. If you came in to apply for a job with me and you were on crutches, I ask you to demonstrate that you can perform the essential functions of the job and you can. Then I ask what happened as to why you were in crutches and you told me you were skateboarding and decided to jump off of a roof and you broke your ankle ... do you think I am going hire you ? No, you are an idiot. If you told me you have a disease, I could care less as long as you could do the job. If you want to talk about workplace discrimination lets have a discussion.

I manage a security company, have been doing so for 7 or so years. I have had many applicants come in over the years that were well interesting. If I have a 6ft 500lb guy come in and interview who has the permits he needs who says he can perform the essential functions of the job but is sitting there breathing very labored, coughing, sweating just sitting there and looking like he can barely breathe, is it discrimination because as a manager of a company I am looking at the best interest of the company ? What I see is a liability, a person who is going to call off sick, a person who is going to cause damage to our vehicles, a person who is going to put off a negative company image to our clients, a person who says they can perform the functions of the job but it is very apparent that getting in and out of a small car all night long for 10 hours straight is either going to kill the employee or cause a lot of financial harm to the company, I am going to have to pay twice as much for his 6x uniform shirt and 60 pants, is that discrimination? Where do you draw the line?

It is right up there why strip clubs aren't going to hire a 300 lb woman, or why models even exist in any capacity. Is that discrimination that I cannot be a model... no...

The irony is California law wouldn't even allow me to ask if the person has a thyroid problem or something to that extent because that would be deemed an inappropriate question and a violation of their rights.

Nor are you allowed to ask me why I need crutches. You know why? Because you aren't allowed to decide what is a valid reason for needing them and what is "idiotic." Because you might decide that my cancer, or my neuropathy, might raise your insurance rate, rightly or wrongly, and that's not allowed.

You're a bigot looking for excuses.

If you think about it, Disney have been subliminally associating high weight with villainy for a long time now. Think Ursula vs the little mermaid, John Ratcliffe in Pocahontas, The Queen of Hearts in comparison to Alice. This has been going on for years, now they're just less subtle about it.

I think it's possible to find that sort of thing anywhere if you look hard enough. What matters to me is if the exhibit would have even worked at achieving its goal, and I don't think it would.

I think the issue here is WHY does it fail to achieve it's goals? It's offensive BECAUSE it reinforces stereotypes (all stereotypes are negative), and because making people "feel bad" virtually never works as a way to cause positive change, so doing it is generally punitive. An organization that promotes awareness of stereotypes rightly takes issue with it, because stereotypes are seldom true.

I agree with you, my point is that arguing over if those stereotypes are wrong or if people are just whining rarely leads to any kind of agreement. The better argument is if the reinforcement of those stereotypes will help further the original goal. A subtle difference, but I think, an important one.

Obesity has nothing to do with our health crisis? You really have your head in the sand. How exactly am I in your business? Am I going into your home and rummaging through your cupboards? I really don't understand your point. What exactly are you trying to get me to agree to? Your statement that you have to be SUPER OBESE to have health issues is so wrong. Just go speak to a cardiologist. Thanks for proving my point that the general population needs more education on a heathy lifestyle.

You're taking one phrase from the post and not considering the point the person was trying to make.

Oh and to clarify a few things.

The person that jumped head first into a lake with a ton of warning signs that use to jump hot coffee on people. When Americans have to pay for their benefits because they can't work due to their own stupidity then yes, I think we should not take care of them... Heartless, yes. People take no responsibility for their own stupidity and instead we are left to pay the bill... Why should we pay for the guy or girl who had un protected sex and ended up with HIV or the idiot who got launched from a car at 60mph and is now paralyzed who was drunk and not wearing his seat belt...

It's easy to be heartless when it's an anonymous person. Things often aren't black and white, and the type of change you seem to be promoting is a slippery slope to some potentially very bad things.

Ugh...I am done with this thread. The "Don't Blame Me" crowd will always look for excuses to their current condition. As long as it doesn't make them feel like they have any responsibility for their actions. Sorry to burst your bubble but you are responsible for the life you lead. I'm not advocating that fat kids be bullied. I'm asking for ACCOUNTABILITY. Yes, we all know skinny isn't always healthy, but I don't know what healthy fat is!! If you are what is considered fat by the general population then eventually it will have some negative impact on your health.

To those of you who wish to point the finger at something else for your condition I say good luck! You are going to need it. There is no participation trophy for living life.


129021931756178550 by goldspursX3, on Flickr

Yeah, they really do care, that's why their parks are loaded with deep fried fatty foods, funnel cakes, corn dogs, ice cream, etc...maybe they can start there and then move on from that!

Honestly, I liked the idea of it, but I also understand not "villianizing" fat people. It's the fat and habits we want to get rid of, not the people! I think there was a better way to do this one!

I totally agree with you!

If they had only focused on the positive characters, we may not be discussing this.

I just have to say that I'm surprised to see so many responses from people on this site who seem think it's acceptable to judge and categorize obese people. As to the debate about fat people causing insurance rates to go up; I could also point out that hospitals having to cover anyone who is uninsured (including the poor, unemployed, many immigrants, etc.) also causes rates to go up, along with so many other factors it's a lost cause to try to list them all. It doesn't really seem fair to target the obese because you're unhappy with your insurance rates.

It's great that all of us here are making healthier choices these days for our own personal benefit. I hope that all of us enjoy continued success through our remaining weight loss and maintenance journeys. However, in regard to the people who choose to make different choices for their lifestyles regarding food and exercise (regardless of whether they are fat-fat or skinny-fat), I'll refrain from passing judgement unless they hold a gun to my head demanding I hand over my chocolate.

Just to clarify, I'm not "condoning" an unhealthy lifestyle. No one needs me to condone or approve of the lifestyle they choose. And for those of you demanding accountability from fat people, get over yourselves. No one needs to be accountable to you. Anyone who is fat that does not have a medical condition is only fooling themselves.

Ugh...I am done with this thread. The "Don't Blame Me" crowd will always look for excuses to their current condition. As long as it doesn't make them feel like they have any responsibility for their actions. Sorry to burst your bubble but you are responsible for the life you lead. I'm not advocating that fat kids be bullied. I'm asking for ACCOUNTABILITY. Yes, we all know skinny isn't always healthy, but I don't know what the fu*k healthy fat is!! If you are what is considered fat by the general population then eventually it will have some negative impact on your health.

To those of you who wish to point the finger at something else for your condition I say good luck! You are going to need it. There is no participation trophy for living life.


129021931756178550 by goldspursX3, on Flickr

Indeed, why do I have to account to you for ANYTHING AT ALL? Who the fu(k are you anyway? Did almighty god come down and declare you his voice here on earth? And you are absolutely wrong. If you are "fat" by BMI, you will be statistically likely to to have health consequences (there is no absolute certainty), but there is no evidence what-so-ever that being "what is considered fat by the general population" guarantees any health consequences what-so-ever.

I don't know where you got the delusions of grandeur, but I don't have to account to you for anything at all, my weight is none of your business, and shaming kids will not lead to healthier lifestyles so it's child abuse.

Actually I kind of agree. I was a super active kid, and always overweight. My favorite pastimes were bike riding, playing tag, and hide and go seek.

It is probably safe to say 80% of kids have horrible eating habits, so they could have made the villains a range of sizes and still got the message across. Snacker and Slacker didn't have to be overweight to prove a point.

"The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance."

Yeeeeah...OR how about people put down the fatty foods and get on the treadmill?

It's not rocket science. Your health suffers when you're fat, so no, the health insurance companies aren't going to pay for it (don't you wish you lived in Canada now, suckers?). Your work suffers since high fat intake makes energy levels suffer, thus production suffers.

I don't see the problem here. I think the Disney World exhibit was awesome. I see an obese person in a McDonald's drive-through and I'm like "...Okay, come on. Walk across the street to the grocery store and pick up a sandwich and a water instead." OR!!! The best one is when you see a very large person in a grocery store buying ridiculous amounts of pop, huge bags of chips, massive amounts of beef, very few veggies and practically no fruit.

I have hugely obese family members. I know their eating habits and I know their lifestyle habits. There is no excuse for it. The human body isn't 'meant' to be fat, it's meant to be lean in order for us to run after our prey. No one can convince me that 400lbs is the next evolutionary step.

Come on. Let's use some common sense here. Stop getting offended and use your anger/rage/pride/whatever to work out more and to make healthier lifestyle choices.

I just have to say that I'm surprised to see so many responses from people on this site who seem think it's acceptable to judge and categorize obese people. As to the debate about fat people causing insurance rates to go up; I could also point out that hospitals having to cover anyone who is uninsured (including the poor, unemployed, many immigrants, etc.) also causes rates to go up, along with so many other factors it's a lost cause to try to list them all. It doesn't really seem fair to target the obese because you're unhappy with your insurance rates.

It's great that all of us here are making healthier choices these days for our own personal benefit. I hope that all of us enjoy continued success through our remaining weight loss and maintenance journeys. However, in regard to the people who choose to make different choices for their lifestyles regarding food and exercise (regardless of whether they are fat-fat or skinny-fat), I'll refrain from passing judgement unless they hold a gun to my head demanding I hand over my chocolate.

Just to clarify, I'm not "condoning" an unhealthy lifestyle. No one needs me to condone or approve of the lifestyle they choose. And for those of you demanding accountability from fat people, get over yourselves. No one needs to be accountable to you. Anyone who is fat that does not have a medical condition is only fooling themselves.

And we all assume these changes in our lifestyles will make us healthier or prolong our lives, but we don't know that it will. Jim Fixx believed it would. Jim pretty much started the American obsession with fitness, running, and healthy eating when he quit smoking in his thirties and took up running and healthy eating. He wrote books (The Complete Book of Running--1977, for one) and articles, appeared on talk shows. Running and "jogging" took off. And guess what? Jim keeled over at 52 during his daily 10 mile run, of a heart attack. His autopsy showed 80-90% blockage in three coronary arteries. On the one hand, some people concluded that running and healthy eating weren't all that good for you after all. Others concluded that Jim would have died even younger had he not cleaned up his lifestyle. Neither of these can be proved, since Jim is dead, and he did take up running and healthy eating. A HS friend of mine is fond of pointing to the fact that her obese, chain-smoking grandmother had no health problems up until her death from old age at 104. Can we conclude that fat and chain-smoking lengthen life, or that she would have lived to 150 had she not smoked and had eaten healthy? The fact is, while there is a correlation between obesity and health, correlation doesn't imply causation, and even if it did, statistics don't apply to individuals--only groups.

This is why everyone makes his or her OWN choices. There is an obvious payoff to being fat, or we wouldn't have so many fat people. For different people, that payoff may be different things. But making a choice to eat differently and exercise more would need to have a better payoff to make sense. (It would also need to be possible--and that one's way tougher.) It's not "fooling yourself" to choose not to change your eating habits, it's having looked at the options and chosen the one that makes sense to you and the one that works or is possible for you. And it's nobody's business what you choose.

Obviously, I've chosen to make some changes. HOWEVER, my diary is and will remain locked, because this site is crawling with self-congratulatory, self-involved cretins who believe their lifestyle is the only valid one and who will happily tell you that you are eating the wrong things, then tell you what you MUST eat to be healthy. Who will tell you your exercise is too little or doesn't count because you don't (or can't) do the correct ones in the correct amount. And they don't need to know anything about you to determine this. If you tell them something about you, they will tell you a dozen reasons why this shouldn't mean you can't do what they think you NEED to do. Because I walk with a crutch (and also ride a motorcycle--so I don't let it stand in my way), and I have severe peripheral neuropathy, I have some limitations as to which exercises and how much exercise I can do. I don't need able-bodied *kitten* suggesting exercises they think I could do, or suggesting that I should be more motivated to "work through" my pain. I have some pretty serious limits as to how long I can stand due to pain, and since I need one hand for the crutch, only one available hand. As a result, by necessity, I eat out more and use more pre-prepared foods than most people on this site consider acceptable. I have cancer of a type that is not treated with chemotherapy, so it hasn't caused weight loss :-( or hair loss :-). But it DOES have bearing on my decisions. I refuse to be miserable, or give up all my favorite foods when cancer has forced me to give up so much and the future is in question.

So I'm not "fooling myself." My obesity resulted from my medical conditions, not vice versa, and it's simply no one's business.

"The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance."

Yeeeeah...OR how about people put down the fatty foods and get on the treadmill?

It's not rocket science. Your health suffers when you're fat, so no, the health insurance companies aren't going to pay for it (don't you wish you lived in Canada now, suckers?). Your work suffers since high fat intake makes energy levels suffer, thus production suffers.

I don't see the problem here. I think the Disney World exhibit was awesome. I see an obese person in a McDonald's drive-through and I'm like "...Okay, come on. Walk across the street to the grocery store and pick up a sandwich and a water instead." OR!!! The best one is when you see a very large person in a grocery store buying ridiculous amounts of pop, huge bags of chips, massive amounts of beef, very few veggies and practically no fruit.

I have hugely obese family members. I know their eating habits and I know their lifestyle habits. There is no excuse for it. The human body isn't 'meant' to be fat, it's meant to be lean in order for us to run after our prey. No one can convince me that 400lbs is the next evolutionary step.

Come on. Let's use some common sense here. Stop getting offended and use your anger/rage/pride/whatever to work out more and to make healthier lifestyle choices.

Please provide some evidence to back up your assertions. All I have ever seen are statistics showing correlation. I have also seen examples of people on the extremes who didn't fit the statistics. That's the nature of statistics. They work well for groups, but completely fall apart with individuals.

“We’re appalled to learn that Disney, a traditional hallmark of childhood happiness and joy, has fallen under the shadow of negativity and discrimination,” the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance said in a statement.

Well, fat people are jollier.

My conspiracy theory for the day: I wouldn't be surprised to find out that this organization is funded by the drug companies.

Especially the drug companies that make the psychotropic drugs that just pile on the pounds.

The exhibit needs to be changed, somehow.
I'm all for encouraging daily physical activity and healthy eating habits BUT there is such a thing as being an unhealthy, inactive 'thin' person. Some people like to call it 'skinny fat'. Just because genetics keeps someone from putting on too much weight doesn't mean they're not clogging their arteries, raising their blood sugar or practically letting their muscles atrophy from the amount of time they spend NOT doing something that involves a great amount of movement.
But society doesn't spread that around. They instead only use obese individuals as an example of unhealthy eating and exercise habits which does nothing more than tell someone 'If you're within this BMI range, there's absolutely nothing wrong with you but if you're not, you're a lazy, gluttonous, disgusting member of our society. "

And I'm sorry but there is no excuse for the shaming. That rarely results in something positive. What you get from shaming someone is usually someone who overeats or starves/purges.
A lot of good that'll do for the children in the end.

But nothing I've said in any post indicates that that I believe in fixating on problems beyond my control. But, believe me, I've tried ignoring problems beyond my control and that sure as he11 doesn't work. I'm not able to walk without the crutch, or without severe pain, if I just deny them. I end up falling, being injured, and having a bigger mess than I started with. SO I do pay attention to these things, even though they are well beyond my control.

I still believe that shaming would be WRONG, even if it were effective.

That's a fair point. I personally believe that shaming is wrong as well, but if I honestly thought it were effective I would be more inclined to consent to such behavior. As I said, I think it's wrong, but if it works I'd at least have to consider it as a viable option.

I was also not saying you were trying point blame elsewhere, I was simply acknowledging points made by others when responding to your question of accountability. And please don't think I was downplaying your injuries. That wasn't my intention at all. If you're doing what you can do to be healthier, and are happy with the steps you've taken, more power to you.

"The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance."

Yeeeeah...OR how about people put down the fatty foods and get on the treadmill?

It's not rocket science. Your health suffers when you're fat, so no, the health insurance companies aren't going to pay for it (don't you wish you lived in Canada now, suckers?). Your work suffers since high fat intake makes energy levels suffer, thus production suffers.

I don't see the problem here. I think the Disney World exhibit was awesome. I see an obese person in a McDonald's drive-through and I'm like "...Okay, come on. Walk across the street to the grocery store and pick up a sandwich and a water instead." OR!!! The best one is when you see a very large person in a grocery store buying ridiculous amounts of pop, huge bags of chips, massive amounts of beef, very few veggies and practically no fruit.

I have hugely obese family members. I know their eating habits and I know their lifestyle habits. There is no excuse for it. The human body isn't 'meant' to be fat, it's meant to be lean in order for us to run after our prey. No one can convince me that 400lbs is the next evolutionary step.

Come on. Let's use some common sense here. Stop getting offended and use your anger/rage/pride/whatever to work out more and to make healthier lifestyle choices.

...

As for overweight kids, that's the parent's fault, hands down. You don't look at an overweight dog and think "Oh, that dog needs to make better lifestyle choices." Come on. It's completely the fault of the owner for not feeding the dog properly OR exercising it enough. Same with kids. That is SOLELY the fault of the parents. If a kid can question their parents for feeding them junk food all the time, maybe the parents will start buying better food. If they don't want their kid to get teased and to make healthy food decisions, then they need to start doing it themselves and stop making their child suffer.

Negative reinforcement doesn't work as well as you think it does. If stopping there kids from getting teased was enough incentive to get parents to provide healthier examples for their children, don't you think they would have already? At that point don't you think it becomes the useful for outside influences to do their part and try to break this vicious cycle?

It's easy to judge the actions of others, but can you honestly say you would accept positively such criticism from strangers on your own life habits? Would you actively change your ways just because someone else wanted you to? Don't you think there are better ways to foster healthier lifestyles in others?

The problem is (and my degree is in learning theory) that people misuse the word "negative reinforcement." It doesn't mean what you think it means, and it's NOT the opposite of positive reinforcement. That's negative punishment. And the words positive and negative are used in the same sense as they are in mathematics, NOT as a value judgement.

Positive reinforcement--The application of a desired stimulus in response to a desired behavior. Child gets to pick a book to be read to him when he gets ready for bed when told.

Negative reinforcement--The withdrawal of a desired stimulus in response to an undesirable behavior. Child is not allowed to play with a favorite toy because s/he bit her/his brother.

Positive punishment--The application of an undesirable stimulus in response to an undesired behavior. Child is spanked for running into the street.

Negative punishment--The withdrawal of a undesirable stimulus in response to a desired behavior. Child is not permitted to leave her/his room until s/he apologizes for biting her/his brother.

Psychologists have demonstrated that reinforcement, positive or negative, results in long-term behavior change, and punishment, positive or negative, stops immediate behavior, but leaves no lasting change.

Shame is definitely undesired and therefor falls into the "punishment" category. If you shame a child until he loses weight, that's negative punishment, and if you shame a child because he got fat, that's positive punishment. Either MIGHT result in a little temporary weight loss--short term. Neither will result in a permanent desirable change.