Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8

Author Topic: No Fat Chicks  (Read 13660 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #40 on: April 01, 2009, 12:17:52 PM »

Obesity is, in my experience, generally a sign of poor impulse control and a lack of self-respect.  These are not attractive traits.
Logged

Lady Duke

  • Shiny Ranger
  • Tested
  • Karma: 3
  • Posts: 2339
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #41 on: April 01, 2009, 02:02:08 PM »

It's a lack of self-respect to be fat?  Can't it also be a fear of intimacy or poor genes or bad eating habits?
Logged

Transportation

  • Tested
  • Karma: 2
  • Posts: 541
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #42 on: April 01, 2009, 02:17:10 PM »

It's a lack of self-respect to be fat?  Can't it also be a fear of intimacy or poor genes or bad eating habits?
What?
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #43 on: April 01, 2009, 02:22:10 PM »

And getting bombarded with opinions and images from mass media only affects insecure people!

 :whoops:

Goddammit, for the nintieth time, I wish there was a :hifive: icon.
Logged

Crouton

  • Tested
  • Karma: 4
  • Posts: 266
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #44 on: April 01, 2009, 03:59:21 PM »

We're still the fattest country on Earth despite media influence. Can't give them credit for everything.
Logged

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #45 on: April 01, 2009, 04:00:36 PM »

Obesity is, in my experience, generally a sign of poor impulse control and a lack of self-respect.  These are not attractive traits.

blackness is, in my experience, generally a sign of criminal behavior and a lack of education.
Logged

Alex

  • the Slug
  • Tested
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 1041
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #46 on: April 01, 2009, 04:14:01 PM »

Or great fondness for Jello puddin'?
Logged

Norondor

  • Where I'm at is: Fuck you, get shot
  • Tested
  • Karma: 30
  • Posts: 4184
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #47 on: April 01, 2009, 04:24:33 PM »

Obesity is, in my experience, generally a sign of poor impulse control and a lack of self-respect.  These are not attractive traits.

blackness is, in my experience, generally a sign of criminal behavior and a lack of education.

Mike used to be fat, but at no point was he ever black.
Logged

Catloaf

  • Tested
  • Karma: 14
  • Posts: 1740
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #48 on: April 01, 2009, 04:35:23 PM »

Would the posting of a YouTube clip of "Baby got Back" without comment be relevant to this thread?  I kinda think it would...
Logged

Fredward

  • a romantic soul
  • Tested
  • Karma: 2
  • Posts: 893
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #49 on: April 01, 2009, 04:36:00 PM »

Obesity is, in my experience, generally a sign of poor impulse control and a lack of self-respect.  These are not attractive traits.

blackness is, in my experience, generally a sign of criminal behavior and a lack of education.

Mike used to be fat, but at no point was he ever black.

Unless we are talking about Mike Jackson? :wat:
Logged
Quote from: Brentai
It's never easy to tell just where the line is between physical malady and the general crushing horror of life itself.

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #50 on: April 01, 2009, 05:03:05 PM »

Honestly?

I think that that the excessive hand-wringing and research into the causes really just mask what we all already know. The longer 'debate' continues, the longer it will be before we confront the the fact that our modern lifestyle is at odds with the design of our bodies. Fifty years is simply no time at all to undo tens of thousands of years of genetic conditioning.

- We live high-stress existences. We may not have as many stress peaks as our ancestors did, but we have a more chronic, continuous problem.
- Inactivity is encouraged in millions of little ways. Both for our own convenience and simply because time demands on the individual have grown too great.
- We have solved the hunger problem (for now), but we have not solved the nutrition problem, which requires far, far more resources per person.

People who have turned to food due to a psychological problem are only a secondary issue. People have always had some mental issues, these are just manifesting themselves as obesity now, because food is  one of the easier escapes, suffers no real social stigma (yes, an obese person is denigrated for being a 'glutton', but an otherwise healthy person eating a hamburger is pretty damned blameless) and is well and truly harmless in moderation.

it's far easier to tumble into a food addiction then a drug addiction and in some ways it's more difficult to stop (you can't exactly 'cold turkey quit' food).

The longer we talk about mental issues, the longer we ignore the fact that our societies are designed that we drive everywhere, live in a just-in-time culture, have no time to walk anywhere or spend time goofing off physically, that amateur sport has collapsed for the casual participant, that casual play has largely been discouraged among children, that our society and technology cater to the "vegetable in a  chair" model of convenience, that... well shit...

Let me put it this way.

Look at the recent economic collapse. Now, there were a number of proximate causes of the collapse, but the REAL root issue is that we've spent decades fuelling growth with debt. You can always push the envelope to a degree, but at a cost. And if you continue to push farther and farther and farther, eventually you hit a point where nature snaps back, ripping up the whole damn thing.

It's a truism of nature that things are elastic - but only to a degree. The human body for instance, can go without sleep for a short while, or it can be chronically sleep deprived in small amounts over a long period, but there is a tolerance for both. It's not set in stone, and it can be highly variable from individual to individual, but it's there. Eventually you would suffer serious health problems, or just pass out.

In the same way, our current social construct has pushed and pushed and pushed. Productivity, that mantra of the businessworld has grown to unheard of leaps and bounds, mostly on the backs of people. Not so much because of increased mechanization or computerization (which I actually approve of!), but by squeezing more hours of the same employees, by moving to a world where both parents work instead of one, by 24/7 blackberry, by endless multitasking, by assigning more work to fewer employees and firing the ones who can't hack it. By the god-fucking-damned fool drive to quantify everything.

This world has no room for walking to work. This world has no tolerance for how long your commute is or what your personal problems are. It doesn't care that you don't have time or energy to do anything with your kids or that making a real dinner or eating something besides a donut-and-coffee for breakfast takes time. Don't give me that horseshit about companies with 'progressive' policies - they are few and far between.

Anyway, I generalize. There are good folks, and compies who 'get it'. And there are still plenty of individuals with a natural knack for using every last minute of their time in an efficient and useful way. There are towns that have tried to improve planning efforts and places where commuting and poor eating habits are discouraged socially (rather than institutionally).

But they are a minority (percentage being debatable).

Until we address the true costs of the way we've chosen to live our lives those costs will continue to have to be paid. If we wish to reduce our obesity levels, it will not happen unless we pay the cost in another way, by unwinding. No institutional program is going to help. It doesn't matter how many people get their stomachs stapled, or how many schools implement healthy lunch programs or force more gym classes. Until we change socially, obesity (and other issues besides) will continue to plague us.
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #51 on: April 01, 2009, 05:04:48 PM »

Would the posting of a YouTube clip of "Baby got Back" without comment be relevant to this thread?  I kinda think it would...

I almost posted this in response to Alex's post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCySTWFcnlM&NR=1
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #52 on: April 01, 2009, 05:16:27 PM »

I think I should clarify my post above in one way:

I don't mean to imply that modern society is "evil". Obviously I have strong personal opinions on "The way things are managed", but when you get down to it it's simply a choice we drifted into without ever really discussing or planning it. Like almost all social change throughout history.

Doing X has a cost and doing Y has a cost. I just want it to be reconised that obesity is a cost. It's part of the 'cost of doing business'. And that it should be talked about in that light.

At that point, society can actually have a debate framed in the correct terms. Do we want to live this way? If so, we must learn to accept those costs. If not we must be prepared to pay in other ways. I realize that would be an unprecedented level of maturity, but know knows? Maybe it's time to actually start displaying some?
Logged

Beat Bandit

  • be entranced by my sexy rhythm
  • High-Bullshit
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65418
  • Posts: 4293
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #53 on: April 01, 2009, 05:16:57 PM »

IM, tl;dr, but I think the best way to sum up my feelings here and probably make someone's head explode because I know it'll be misinterpreted but fuck it.

If T.V. is responsible for Bulimia, video games are responsible for murder.
Logged

Ocksi

  • Guy on a buffalo
  • Tested
  • Karma: 14
  • Posts: 575
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #54 on: April 01, 2009, 05:22:05 PM »

I agree with IM, but find his lack of mention regarding things like processed food and extremely high caloric beverages replacing water very odd.
Logged

Zaratustra

  • what
  • Tested
  • Karma: 48
  • Posts: 3691
    • View Profile
    • Zaratustra Productions
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #55 on: April 01, 2009, 05:25:58 PM »

and high fructose corn syrup

Royal☭

  • Supreme Court Judge President
  • Tested
  • Karma: 88
  • Posts: 6301
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #56 on: April 01, 2009, 05:29:07 PM »

I blame the car.  I realized that I drive 1 mile to go to the store rather than walk that distance because I am lazy.  There are a lot of places in my city I could probably walk to, but a lack of a public transit and a city layout designed around use of the automobile make it less enticing than it should be.


It's also not crazy to suggest that TV causes eating disorders.  Hell, the island of Fiji used to be all about the fat people, up until television gave them crazy eating disorders.

Ocksi

  • Guy on a buffalo
  • Tested
  • Karma: 14
  • Posts: 575
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #57 on: April 01, 2009, 05:30:00 PM »

and high fructose corn syrup
I did say processed food.

Regarding the car, I got a bike recently and use it to get around town, almost exclusively.  If I'm running late on the way to work or something, I'll wait for a bus to catch up to me, then rack my bike up and hop on.  I leave a lot earlier than I would driving, but I've lost a bit of weight, can actually run a little now without dying, and am generally better for it.

Granted we have free buses and the whole town is about seven miles long!
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #58 on: April 01, 2009, 05:34:57 PM »

I agree with IM, but find his lack of mention regarding things like processed food and extremely high caloric beverages replacing water very odd.

These figure into my explanation in a roundabout way.

First, stuff like pop is a simple, popular product, like cheap candy. Consumption of pop over water is a choice no different than eating that bag of chips etc. etc.

As for processed foods, they cater either to the manufacturer (It's simpler to make a fake food patty that behaves sort of like real food but is cheap to manufacture, highly consistent, and easy to manipulate) to the consumer (Instant meal! Almost kinda-sorta like the real thing!), or both.

One thing I would call myself out on missing is the role of the media. But that's a real chicken-and-egg debate. If we improve our lives, will the media grudgiungly change to follow? I don't know. I don't feel nearly as comfortable talking about it other than to say it's another case of us creating a mass desire for something we can't have.
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: No Fat Chicks
« Reply #59 on: April 01, 2009, 05:39:11 PM »

One thing I do know. If children are taught to love fruits, vegetables, and other healthy food, that becomes the comforting food of their childhood and will always be desired (in most cases anyway). If they grow up eating junk, they will continue to do so.

'Expediency' in parenting has really harmed our ability to teach this, but so has the pervasive nature of junk foods. Until we can get the volume down to a dull roar, it will remain damned hard for the average parent to teach and build that attitude. And it's twice as hard for a parent raised on junk food themselves. But again, this comes back to a debate about social costs.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8