TV's reality: Everyone is thin, and fat people are often ridiculed
October 8, 2001 9:02 PM Subscribe
posted by aaron at 9:09 PM on October 8, 2001
But besides that, these "studies" , as a general rule, appear to lean towards an expected result as they are being conducted. They "set out" to prove a point, making them not "studies" at all but expository pieces.
For instance, in the limited Non-Simpsons TV viewing I participate in:
Boston Public: The overweight main characters on this show are a principal and a teacher who both are rather sympathetic, strong characters. Arguably the most interesting on the show. And I don't recall seeing either of them eating on the show except for the episode where they went on a date. Thus negating two key points of the study.
Drew Carey Show: Well, DUH.
posted by glenwood at 9:12 PM on October 8, 2001
So basically, writers and producers are heavilly influenced by the world around them. An in NYC and LA, fatness is not as common.
Not saying this is the only reason thin people dominate the airwaves, but it's a reason that I think few people in "the biz" even think about the topic.
posted by RoyalJack at 9:23 PM on October 8, 2001
Next week's revelation: overweight people less likely to be presented positively in Vogue, Elle, and other magazines designed by spiteful coked-up anorexics.
posted by holgate at 9:28 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by Hildago at 9:35 PM on October 8, 2001
Maybe, but I think producers/network execs. simply have high school mentality: thin, beautiful people are cool and over-weight/nerds/not-so-beautiful are butt-of-all jokes. Just like high school. Makes sense since high school aged kids are their prime target audiance. In other words, pandering to the lowest denominator for maximum profit.
posted by Rastafari at 9:44 PM on October 8, 2001
Fat people get made fun of more then say, people with beards, because fatness makes people larger and heavier, and weight and size have a great impact on one's interactions with the world. And that most people find overweight people unattractive, of course. Not that I support making fun of people for their physical traits.
posted by Jack Masters at 9:49 PM on October 8, 2001
Which is, of course, hate. (It is not acceptable to dislike someone for their skin color, now is it?)
posted by aaron at 10:00 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by rebeccablood at 10:02 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by dopamine at 10:17 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by robotcore at 10:20 PM on October 8, 2001
clearly tv isn't the origin of discrimination of any kind, but is it serving to perpetuate discrimination beyond what would be acceptable with out the influence of television?
posted by robotcore at 10:29 PM on October 8, 2001
someone who is racist may not be attracted to another race; on the other hand, despite their best efforts, they might. ;)
you might be able to make a reasonable case for someone being *shallow* if they were only attracted to people who looked a certain way, or made a certain amount of money, or had otherwise some trait that you and I don't possess. :)
but that's about as far as you can go with it.
posted by rebeccablood at 10:29 PM on October 8, 2001
Anybody? Anybody?
posted by Dreama at 10:29 PM on October 8, 2001
but we've been trained not to see them as "undernourished" but as "hot".
dreama: I don't watch any tv to speak of, but what about that female lawyer on that one law show? (sorry--I really *don't * watch tv.) it also starred that incredibly emaciated woman who used to be on twin peaks.
also, drew carey, who, from the few shows I've seen, projects a wonderful healthy self-image. there was the incredibly heartbreaking episode where he broke up with his fiance, did you see that? she was so full of self-hatred because of her weight that she didn't believe anyone could love her. it was very sensitive and very truthful and very well done. and incredibly sad.
posted by rebeccablood at 10:36 PM on October 8, 2001
It seems obvious that TV would feature mostly thin people, as they are generally considered more attractive, and sex sells. Of course, since TV is largely responsible for what people consider attractive (In degree, if not kind. Studies have shown it's largely cultural.), it's a downward spiral situation.
posted by Nothing at 10:36 PM on October 8, 2001
In my lifetime, I've suffered from job discrimination, lack of interest from other people, both social and romantic, childhood teasing that escalated into death threats, etc.
Among some people, even seeing the words "I'm fat" conjure up images of the writer being stupid, slovenly and lazy.
So, yeah, I'd say it's doing a pretty darn good job.
posted by digital_insomnia at 10:45 PM on October 8, 2001
not to discount your experience in any way, but each of those things has happened to me -- the job discrimination only once, to my knowledge, the rest in spades. things like that happen to everyone.
posted by rebeccablood at 10:50 PM on October 8, 2001
i think the drew carey show can be pretty good, but as i recall, most of the episodes i've seen have featured some mocking banter regarding girth between drew and other characters on the show.
posted by robotcore at 10:51 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by Aikido at 10:52 PM on October 8, 2001
Lemme ask you this, Aaron, when you're fantasizing about the woman of your dreams, does she look more like Catherine Manheim or Catherine Zeta Jones?
posted by Doug at 10:56 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by Doug at 11:01 PM on October 8, 2001
Oh, I'm sure it has. But overhearing your boss tell a male coworker that he's going to a get a position and "not that fat cow" because it wouldn't reflect well on the company? Having an online friend of 3 years disassociate himself completely from you once he saw a picture? Being forced to change schools because you genuinely feared for your life from a group who didn't like you based solely on your shape?
I'm not saying that things like this don't happen to everyone to some degree or the other. But my experiences have hammered home the fact that to be accepted, you have to be thin. I'm not decrying it, it's just the way it is.
(See comments above for further proof.)
posted by digital_insomnia at 11:03 PM on October 8, 2001
*poof, disappears*
posted by calvarez at 11:11 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by Katy Action at 11:13 PM on October 8, 2001
click on that link now if you weren't there, or even if you were, to refresh your memory. lots of disinformation debunked in that thread. go have a read.
posted by rebeccablood at 11:14 PM on October 8, 2001
Indeed that is the case... But saying...
And that most people find overweight people unattractive, of course.
Is a very broad and extremely prejudiced statement that claims to speak for all, but really only speaks for one. It only speaks for the writer who wrote it.
A more true statement is that most people find dirty Hippies filthy and skanky. Now THAT I can agree on ;)
posted by RoyalJack at 11:15 PM on October 8, 2001
*sigh* People REALLY need to be able to distinguish race from a physcial condition. Okay, in a nutshell folks, one is innate while the other is a product of your lifestyle. Not to say all obese people aren't inherently obese, but the truth remains MOST modern cases of obesity are not hereditary.
Unlike race, disease, or ethnicity, you can change obesity. A vegetarian diet and excerise do work, you just need to be able to adhere to them.
Doug: Damn, looks like I'll be laughing in my sleep after reading your post. I'm literally slapping my knee here.
clavarez: Gee, you're going to tell me your obesity is not a result of your high glycogen diet? Do you run through marathons are simply walk to the finish line?
posted by Aikido at 11:21 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by owillis at 11:29 PM on October 8, 2001
Television that offers them the obese reality -- bulbous people gasping for breath after short walks, bulging out of stretch pants, hanging over straining belt buckles, sweating when everyone else is comfortable, dying young but not young and beautful -- is not going to be watched.
Accept it or outlaw it, because you can't change people's fantasies.
posted by pracowity at 11:40 PM on October 8, 2001
:::ding!::: Just like white people used to be trained that African-Americans were "subhuman savages." Just like they used to be trained way back when that the ultimate in attractiveness was to be as fat and pale as humanly possible, because it indicated you were an aristrocrat and didn't have to live and work outside like the serfs. It is entirely TRAINING. You are trained to dislike and disparage overweight people. You ought to see a major, major problem with that.
well, then, those people don't understand the nature of attraction.
No, we understand it perfectly. And as the article makes clear, your (universal you) "lack of attraction" for overweight people is so overwhelming that it directly negatively affects every aspect of how you treat them as human beings, in platonic friendships, work relationships, everything across the board.
And even if it were completely limited to matters of dating, we would have just as much right to be enraged, because again, the hatred is near universal. Doug tries to make the specious argument about "some people not liking people with long hair or blue eyes," but the reality is that there are huge percentages of people that DO go for people with long hair or blue eyes, so the overall effect for long-haired blue-eyed people is nil. But if you're fat, practically everyone will completely ignore you romantically, unless you, you know, "stay with your own kind," as the Old School bigots would say. So yes, even on matters of attraction it's societal ostracization and hatred.
Just own up to it: You are a bigot. We all are in some ways ... you, me, everyone in this thread, everyone on earth. We have advanced as a society at least partially, to the point where those people who are members of groups with large amounts of money and media access have finally been able to shame society into providing them some small measure of pseudoequality. The overweight just haven't developed a good enough lobbying organization yet, and humans all still have a feral need to label and stomp upon SOMEBODY in order to establish that they themselves are not at the bottom of the totem pole, so right now fat people are still acceptable targets.
And then there are people like Aikido, who seems to actually revel in their hate:
I don't feel sorry for obese people unless its genetic (which for most isn't)
You have no way of knowing that at all. And you especially have no way of knowing through casual eye contact whether any random person's weight is genetic or slovenly. Ergo, you are a bigot. QED. (Not that the rest of your hate spewage in that paragraph doesn't already indicate that...)
Rebecca, not long ago there was a study done of successful career women and weight. It was discovered that if a female in the United States is overweight, she has almost ZERO chance of ever making it into management at any company, no matter her prior successes, brains or ability. The number was literally 3%. If you are a female and overweight, you are almost completely doomed to be a low-level salaried employee until the day you die. So please, don't even try to compare your own experiences to those of the overweight, because it isn't even in the same ballpark. (It is somewhat less horrid for men, by the way, but only when comparing to overweight women. For men it was around 18%, as I recall, which is still in the realm of widespread societal evil.)
And for the record, I have always considered Catherine Zeta-Jones to be a remarkably plain-looking woman, with an ego so massive and such a warped view of her own importance that I couldn't stand to be around her for two seconds. So yeah, I'd absolutely go for Manheim first.
posted by aaron at 11:43 PM on October 8, 2001
We haven't been "trained" to see them as hot, they are on TV because we see them as hot.
TV is the reflection, not the cause. What is generally seen as attractive can be shown (with at least as much science as this 'study') to be evolutionarily programmed.
Thin, symmetrical, clear skinned and a large number of other characteristics are simply more attractive for the majority... get over it.
posted by soulhuntre at 11:44 PM on October 8, 2001
The same thing can be said for other body features; weight is just one of them. The voluptuous women in the renaisaince period were considered highly desirable (and still are by some people). Today, our culture considers the tall skinny model to be more attractive.
It sucks, but certain physical features are considered more or less desirable by our culture. All we can do is refuse to be a sheep and remind ourselves that it's the person inside that counts.
</soapbox>
posted by Lionfire at 11:50 PM on October 8, 2001
posted by Frasermoo at 12:15 AM on October 9, 2001
Is television reflecting reality? is reality reflecting television?
Neither. Culture products have little to nothing to do with an objective reality as this study, and a million others, conclude. Culture products, especially those produced by corporations, are mostly made by a fairly homogenous group of people centered in a handful of towns. For the most part, media “realities” are dependent on their ideological constructs and desire to make money.
Or, as the Aspen Report partially states: media are constructed, and construct reality; media have ideological and political implications.
simply have high school mentality: thin, beautiful people are cool and over-weight/nerds/not-so-beautiful are butt-of-all jokes.
owillis mentioned the reason for this above.
Producers pick pretty actors because that’s who audiences want to look at. Fat people and nerds are made to seem inferior because audiences can relate. Is it good? Is it right? No, it’s business.
posted by raaka at 12:16 AM on October 9, 2001
see -- i used to be fat. i grew up as 'the fat kid' and got plenty of ridicule for it. being called 'fat ass' instead of your name for a long time isn't something easy to deal with. eventually, i got tired of it. i stopped sitting on my ass constantly playing video games and i started exercising, eating well and concentrating on my health. i lost plenty of weight and no one i meet these days can believe i was once the fat kid.
which leads me to this. i feel no pity for fat people (aside from those with extreme cases of glandular disorders that all but shuts down their metabolism. THIS is genetic and can be blamed without me calling bullshit because it results in extreme cases of morbid obesity), whether they're 20 pounds overweight or 100 or more. MOST people are fat because of a sedentary lifestyle, unhealthy diet, etc. people like to hide behind the whole 'genetic' bullshit because it allows them to blame something but themselves. and thats the way it works in this country. no one's responsible for their own actions, we can always blame something else. fuck taking responsibility.
a friend of mine's family welcomed a foreign exchange student from somewhere in europe (the exact location escapes me) into their home for a schoolyear. she's tall and thin, as is her whole family. one day, this girl said to her 'mary ... your family is full of freaks!' when she asked why, she replied 'you're all thin! aren't most americans fat?' i could be wrong, but isn't it like something like almost 50% of america overweight?
the problem is -- this isn't like being black or arab where you're BORN in such a way, it's simply a result of being lazy and gluttonous. and we're SUPPOSED to feel sorry for these people? we're supposed to ignore the fact that being overweight attributes to numerous health problems and say 'it's ok!'
fuck that. we ban smokers from restaraunts because people fear for the unhealthy effects of second-hand smoke, but don't stop for a second to consider the unhealthy effects of sucking down an enormous slice of cheesecake?
does it make me insensitive that i happen to be disgusted by fat people? does it make me insensitive that i call them lazy slobs as opposed to 'genetically challenged?'
when did it become virtuous to admire laziness? i have to work out hard to keep the fat off. isn't hard work supposed to be admirable? or am i somehow more of an ass for losing the weight and shunning my hefty brethren?
see, i know what it's like to be fat. and i'm *GLAD* people didn't coddle me and tell me it was ok. because it's fucking unhealthy and it's NOT attractive -- the only people that say that are fat people or people trying to appear caring and open-minded -- kinda like only ugly people say looks don't matter.
my advice to the fatties -- get off your ass, get away from the computer. you're not so important that you don't have 30 minutes a day to work out. stop sucking down a six pack of mountain dew a day, stop eating a bag of cookies a night. and get off your fucking high horse begging to be accepted just because.
you know, aaron, i don't *HATE* fat people. if i hate someone, it's because of something they've done to me. i don't go around picking on fat people for no reason, i don't point them out of a crowd, because i know what it's like to be treated like that and it truly sucked. BUT ... i do NOT have any sort of bullshit respect towards them just because they're fat, i do NOT think it's ok to have that sort of lifestyle, i do NOT buy the genetic bullshit 95% of the time and i do NOT find them attractive. if that's bigotry in your eyes, so be it. i'll just accept that it's also ignorance in your eyes that being fat is simply -- ok.
posted by aenemated at 12:19 AM on October 9, 2001
posted by Katy Action at 12:28 AM on October 9, 2001
Hehe, let me tell my brothers and sisters that. We've all been vegetarians our whole lives, and we run 5/10 thin and 5/10 fat. Interestingly, it's the five busiest of us who tend to be the five fattest.
The amount of kneejerk hatred that gets spewed here every time this topic comes up makes me wonder what the hell is wrong with a lot of you. If you really need to be so indignant about someone's lifestyle, why not choose those who have some impact on your life, not just their own.
posted by Dreama at 12:32 AM on October 9, 2001
Although it's not likely to happen in my lifetime, no, not sorry. Just treated as something slightly better than subhuman simply because of the way we look.
posted by digital_insomnia at 12:53 AM on October 9, 2001
i don't purport to be the healthiest person or lead the healthiest lifestyle. i probably drink too much, i smoke quite a bit, i have a fucked up sleep schedule -- but fuckit, gotta die somehow. i know these things are bad for me, but i don't blame the tobacco companies nor do i blame bombay sapphire for making such damn good gin. it's my choice to smoke and it's my choice to get stupid drunk every now and then. that's fine with me, but i don't beg people to accept me despite these facts. if you have a problem with my smoking or drinking -- sorry! you're probably no fun to go out with if you don't let go and get silly sometimes, so i probably wouldn't wanna hang out with you anyway.
i just know i feel MUCH better despite these other things because i work out and eat sensibly. i feel better about myself because i know i was able to motivate myself to lose weight, something i see as a respectable accomplishment.
i'm equally disgusted by anorexic looking people. i prefer some amount of meat on the chicks i dig. but there's a limit to what i like. and i really can't say i'm 'preaching' to the fat people, i'm just stating my opinion and the experience i had. if you're fat and don't mind, good for you, but don't expect me to appreciate it. my issue lies in the people that want to blame something besides themselves, because that mentality in ANY instance sickens me. i was fat because i sat around and played video games as a kid, eating swiss cake rolls, pop tarts, fudge rounds, etc. and no matter what any of some of you choose to say, i'm going to believe THAT's the primary cause of obesity.
posted by aenemated at 1:02 AM on October 9, 2001
dreama: I don't watch any tv to speak of, but what about that female lawyer on that one law show? (sorry--I really *don't * watch tv.) it also starred that incredibly emaciated woman who used to be on twin peaks.Her name is Camryn Manheim. She and other 'women of girth' were discussed at length at MeFi's previous Annual Fat Women on TV Thread.
posted by tamim at 1:03 AM on October 9, 2001
Simple query -- can you name a fat character on TV who isn't a.) on a David E. Kelley produced show or b.) doesn't make at least one fat joke about himself or someone else in every single episode of the show in question?
May I suggest Nero Wolfe, whose razor-sharp wit and abrasive personality are far more memorable and interesting than his girth. Highly recommended.
posted by JDC8 at 1:24 AM on October 9, 2001
Food for thought, you should pardon the expression.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 1:56 AM on October 9, 2001
Similarly, if Americans are getting fatter, and they definitely appear to be, while each one of them should change their lifestyle we still need to figure out why so many people's lifestyles and eating habits are so crappy to begin with. This dismissive fat-hating thing- yeah, it is bigoted and more so it's stupid and thoughtless. If we were just talking about the one town fat guy, like Mayberry's one town drunk, that'd be one thing- but if 30, 40, 50% of Americans are becoming close to or clinically obese, then that's a national problem.
aenemated: i was fat because i sat around and played video games as a kid, eating swiss cake rolls, pop tarts, fudge rounds
Well, then you were a gluttonous lazy fuck, but don't hold your own poor habits against the rest of us. Christ, you're like a born-again Christian, except about cellulite! For the record, I myself am a somewhat chubby guy who eats healthy food in normal-sized portions- I grew up with a clinical dietician Mom and have always known how to eat right, no mountain dew or snacky cakes for me. However, the long hours I put into being a sysadmin- for which I make an irresistably higher salary than both of my parents' combined- means a lot of time sitting motionless over a keyboard, and that has slowed my body down completely. A little math: just 100 calories a day- equal to just a half a soda- for a year equals 10 extra pounds of calories. So it doesn't take much imbalance in lifestyle to start adding up over two or three years, even without considering the virus or genetic theories. Fat people may be fat, but they're still fucking human beings. Why hate them?
posted by hincandenza at 2:11 AM on October 9, 2001
Only if it's turned off, and you've got a hella-wide-screen, you big fat wobbly yankee bastards! And I mean that in the nicest possible sense, of course.
And for the record, I dislike pretty much everybody. Misanthropy makes it easier to keep track of who you're intolerant towards - it's the whole species!
Flame away.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:21 AM on October 9, 2001
If that's hating, what do suicide bombers feel? Hate and a mild desire to fly airliners into skyscrapers?
If overweight is mainly hereditary, then the rapid rise in recent years wouldn't happen (unless someone is quietly kiiling off the thin people ;-). And as far as I know, the idea that it's a disease caused by some external agent is considered pretty whacky. So lifestyle is the accepted explanation.
It seems to me that the argument should be whether people have the right to choose a fat lifestyle, not whether they are victims. For the record, I think they do have that choice, although I personally find it difficult to understand why anyone would do so (but then I find it difficult to understand lots of things).
posted by andrew cooke at 3:54 AM on October 9, 2001
Personally, over weight people only bother me when they make an issue of it themselves. I feel for people who have a genuine medical issue with obesity and I admire people who see something in themselves that they're not happy with and try to rectify it. What I don't like is people who complain about their weight while sitting in front of the tv, stuffing their face with potato chips, and doing nothing to solve it.
If your weight doesn't bother you, it doesn't bother me. But when it does bother you, don't complain, act.
posted by Jubey at 4:26 AM on October 9, 2001
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:41 AM on October 9, 2001
Anything you'd like to say about the subject at hand?
posted by Jubey at 4:53 AM on October 9, 2001
"TV's reality: Everyone is thin, and fat people are often ridiculed"
I repeat, is there anything you want to say about the subject at hand. You seem to be interested in picking a fight.
I responded to you bcause you actually asked people to flame away and I addressed your remarks.You tried to be inflammatory and when it worked and you got a reaction, you proceeded to get defensive. Why post something, ask to get flamed and then get upset when you do?
I'm not interested in addressing a past discussion, I'm not interested in hijacking this thread, if you can't stay on topic, don't expect anything more from me. Thank you, and in your words, get over it.
posted by Jubey at 5:15 AM on October 9, 2001
posted by Jubey at 5:25 AM on October 9, 2001
>> And that most people find overweight people
>> unattractive, of course.
>
> Which is, of course, hate. (It is not acceptable to dislike
> someone for their skin color, now is it?)
If failing to find someone attractive is the same as hating him then having an aesthetic sense is now hate, and no doubt soon to be a hate crime.
Try not to trivialize hate this way, aaron. Hate is for death camps and lynchings.
posted by jfuller at 6:07 AM on October 9, 2001
What do you think about attractiveness in terms of an entire race? I saw a show on Eskimos, it was extremely interesting, however the people I saw aesthetically did not appeal to me. If I don't find these Eskimos attractive, what does that make me? They're a capable group of people, I certainly don't hate them, I just don't find them attractive. Am I a racist? Just curious.
I don't think people should be persecuted for having a preference. If they preach hate against a group, that's different. However simply liking one thing over another is just human nature, and after all, there are people out there who prefer overweight partners over any other. I don't hear anyone giving them flack!
posted by Jubey at 6:31 AM on October 9, 2001
I'm not sure most people do, these days... they just think of themselves as products of their genetic programming...
posted by ph00dz at 6:34 AM on October 9, 2001
I'm a fat person. I'm not any more lazy than the next person. I don't drink a six pack of Mountain Dew and eat an entire pizza at a time. I do have some problems with portion control, yes, but I'm working on it. I'm also working on making better food choices. And I fully admit that my weight problem isn't wholly genetic (despite the fact that my family is a bunch of short round people), but mostly due to having a desk job and having problems with self-esteem and depression. I've lost nearly 20 pounds in the last two months, but to look at me, you wouldn't know that I'd lost any, as I still have a long way to go. It took me 10 years for me to gain this weight; it would be ridiculous for me to expect to lose it all immediately.
It really distresses me that people would just assume that all fat people do nothing but eat all the time. And that they are unaware of how unhealthy being fat is. Fat people tend to be pretty aware of such things--their friends, families, co-workers, and healthcare providers have made sure that they know. Not to mention the media. However, I know that it's something that happens, as this thread has so clearly demonstrated.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that unless you know for sure that the person in question is a lazy fuck, maybe you shouldn't assume that they are.
And yes, this is a sensitive issue for me.
posted by eilatan at 6:53 AM on October 9, 2001
I think it's sugar. Sugar, white flour...our grocery stores have become probably 60% empty carbohydrates that severely fuck with our system. I'm 6' tall and last year found myself approaching 200 pounds. I replaced my daily soda with water and stopped grabbing kit kats from the honor jar and without any more effort almost immediately found myself at 185, and in need of new pants.
Having a 2 year old I'm more acutely aware of just how much sugar is waved in our face. Almost every advertisement aimed at children is trying to sell them empty calories and food coloring. Everytime the average American's body craves water they grab carbonated sugar-water, which in turn dehydrates them and screws up their blood sugar levels.
Could this be the culprit?
(No, I'm not an atkin's diet freak or sugar buster)
posted by glenwood at 7:23 AM on October 9, 2001
posted by MattD at 7:30 AM on October 9, 2001
I would like to point out that the higher up the economic ladder you go, the thinner people tend to be. It's the poor people living in crappy neighborhoods and trailer parks who tend to be the fattest. And the rise in obesity that glenwood points out has happened at exactly the same time as the huge movement of wealth toward the upper end of the socio-economic scale that begun in the Reagan years. Coincidence? I think not.
Poor people -- all of them lazy, "gluttonous" shiftless, selfish, etc? I think not. Not educated on good nutrition? Yes. Living in crappy neighborhoods where they can't get out and safely walk for exercise? Yes. Unable to afford healthclub memberships? Yes. Living near cheap grocery stores that always have sales on Pringles and hotdogs but charge a lot for nasty old fly-blown produce? Yes. Generally depressed and feeling powerless and watching a lot of TV (with ads for snacks)? Why, yes. And generally without positive teachers or role models to help them develop self-discipline and motivation as children? Absolutely.
DO NOT GO DOWN THAT SORRY PATH where you tell me about how you saw some welfare mom buying cigs and beer in front of you in the checkout line. While I am sure some people like that exist, it defies REASON that every person on welfare is like that, or is as "lazy and gluttonous" as you who condemn fat people claim. Just read through the list of strikes against them above, and admit to yourself how hard it might be to be thin if you lived like that.
posted by jfwlucy at 8:35 AM on October 9, 2001
The only people that say that [fat is attractive] are fat people or people trying to appear caring and open-minded.
Oh no! We wouldn't want to be caring and open-minded! Think of the children!
posted by jess at 8:57 AM on October 9, 2001
Try working 80 hour weeks and see how much fucking exercise you get, bucko.
posted by Foosnark at 10:28 AM on October 9, 2001
If a lifestyle change is important enough to you, you will find a way to do it. I'm not suggesting that is what you're after, but you are in charge of how much you work and for whom, surely. There are many people with time intensive jobs who can still make exercise a part of their life.
posted by Jubey at 10:51 AM on October 9, 2001
Oh no! We wouldn't want to be caring and open-minded! Think of the children!
Why is considering someone to be unattractive because they're fat so wrong? Everyone has their own idea of who or what is beautiful. If someone considers fat to be unattractive, who are any of us to tell them their wrong. One of the best part's of being an individual is the ability to think for yourself.
Personally, I find obese people to be unattractive. Notice I said obese. I think you can be overweight, and still be amazingly attractive. But there comes a point where just a little extra weight transforms into obesity. And for me, it's not so much the physical aspect of the obesity, but the health aspect. Obese people have a significantly higher risk of heat attack, stroke, blood clots, death at a young age, and numerous other negative side effects.
And please don't feed me the "it's genetic" line. While for some people it may be genetic, 9 out of 10 times, it's just poor eating habits and a sedentary lifestyle. I know there's going to be a backlash for me saying this, because it's not politically correct. Fuck being politically correct. I've been around enough overweight people in my life to know exactly what it is.
During my childhood I was skinny. Stick-like, almost. I could eat anything and not gain a pound, so I did. As I hit middle school, and puberty, I kept the same eating habits. Know what? I blew up. From about 8th grade until freshman year of college, I was anywhere from 20 to 50 pounds overweight. And because of fucking genetics, I got a nice decease called gynocomastia, which made high school really fun.
In any event, to make a long story short, through out high school I continued to eat like I was a kid who could eat anything, when I was a teenager who couldn't. I played a lot of video games, and most of the time I stayed indoors. I also played some lacrosse, but not nearly enough to shift the balance. So I get to college, start running around more, and becoming more active. Eating better meals, and getting some better exercise walking to class. In 3 months, lost 40lbs. People didn't even recognize me in the winter. I'm a sophomore now, and over the past year I've taken my weight from 210lbs, to 155-60lbs (I'm 6 feet tall, by the way).
So I guess my point is, if you're overweight, there are things you can do about it. Instead of being so defensive about it, as I see many people on this board doing, take a long look in the mirror and ask yourself if it's REALLY genetics that's causing it.
posted by SweetJesus at 11:05 AM on October 9, 2001
>> are ? on TV because we see them as hot.
Really? Anorexic models were always hot? I thought that this was an "aquired taste"...?
Seems to me, by your thinking, some of the most famous models and actresses from the 40's, 50's and 60's just wouldn't qualify?
Gee, weren't they on TV/film too? Marilyn? Betty?
>>"TV is the reflection, not the cause. What is generally
>>seen as attractive can be shown (with at least as much
>>science as this 'study') to be evolutionarily
>>programmed."
No, actually "media" can, has, does and WILL influence our thinking, emotions and habits. "Twiggy" wasn't always considered the "ideal" body-shape. Heck, up until last century, obesity was considered reasonably attractive (it showed at least that said person could AFFORD to be obese, which was attractive in itself for terms of supporting oneself)...
And, according to most of the information I've seen on evolution, "twiggy" and anorexic are not prime movers in terms of "subconcious beauty" requirements... The mind tends to like some curves. Maybe if your culture is "food scarce" you would consider an anorexic spouse attractive for logistics reasons, but again that is something that could change with circumstance...
>>Thin, symmetrical, clear skinned and a large number of
>>other characteristics are simply more attractive for the
>>majority... get over it.
Have a look at even recent American media history. The 40's, 50's and 60's... "thin" wasn't attractive until relatively recently. Most of the "superhot" babes of the past wouldn't cut it today. They would be considered too "fat" for TV... Times change, and frankly "media" helps shift opinion, tastes and thought.
posted by jkaczor at 11:24 AM on October 9, 2001
Ultimately it is your genetic mix that will make you more succeptable to health conditions. There are people who are quite obese by current "health" standards, but actually are quite healthy, active and will live a long life.
The problem with statistics, studies, reports, standards and their ilk is that they are usually:
- funded by a special interest.
- take a small sample population.
- occur over a short duration.
Frankly how short-term ARE your memories? All of these "healthy/unhealthy" dietary choices, regimes, etc have "ping-ponged" back and forth over the last 30 years...
This is good for you one year, bad another, this is a "wonder" fiber, now discredited, etc, etc, etc.
Ultimately it comes down to your genetic succeptability to illness, the factors that will shift your balance and most importantly YOUR STRESS LEVEL...
If you are a happy, self-actualized person, who is not affected by what people think, you will be just fine. However most people cannot live in todays society without feeling "left-out", "singled-out", "tormented", that they aren't living up to the "ideal standards"...
The "media" affects this. The "media" does not simply show what the public wants, we've seen what is attractive and acceptable change over the years, it's not a normal mirror, it's more like a "fun-house mirror" that distorts, makes you think "maybe I should look like that?"...
Gee, cut fat out of your life, and jog every day, you will be perfectly healthy, right? Hnmmmm, didn't the guy who started the whole jogging craze drop dead of a heart attack? Too little body fat? 'course I think he smoked like a fiend as well...
Yet, on the other hand, didn't old "rolly-polly", smokin', jokin', drinkin' Winston Churchill live well into his 90's?
Until you have an accurate map of our DNA, and data for at least a century you'd better fuck off when it comes to calling fat people lazy, gluttonous or indolent.
Thin people get cancer, heart attacks, strokes, etc. Heck, I think recent studies have shown that the thinner you are, the more succeptable to stroke you are.... Wooohooo! I'd rather have my brain than my body.... To make a Copeland quote; "my body is the station wagon I drive my brain around in".
This just in: staying single and having kids will ensure that you are at a lower risk for senility later in life... So you will be old and smart. Cool! Let's everyone do this, yep, make sure we all age "gracefully", it's soooooo important, right?... Gee, what will happen in 150 years? Who the fuck cares, right?
Short-term memories, short-term thinking, small minds and pig-headed attitudes... Ya woulda thunk this whole "internet" thang woulda changed somu dat, eh?
(A not so obese, but overweight kind of sendentary guy, who is married to a "clinically" obese, always active, "never eats" lady... who see's the effects of "comments" from ass-wipes lavish on her daily. You've figured out how to use a fucking computer, connect to the internet and communicate in a forum, maybe you've heard of the terms: "self-fulfilling prophecy" and "cyclical"...)
posted by jkaczor at 11:52 AM on October 9, 2001
Glenwood made an excellent point about the sugar/white flour issue, which is what I was sort of getting at; asking about the larger causes and circumstances that make so many of us fat or even obese. While yes, most individuals can't really blame genetics or virii, and obese folk are often woefully unattractive- in particular morbidly obese, because someone who puts on 30 pounds can still look reasonably attractive- we need to be asking the larger questions why are so many people becoming fat? If it's particular to American society and our previous generations weren't this heavy, then what's changed for us?
Sedentary workplaces and home lives, along with the limited carb-heavy dietary choices available to us such as preprocessed and packaged foods and fast foods, all heavy in sugar, fat, and basic carbohydrates: these seem to be the real culprit, of which a large percentage of Americans are falling prey. Sugars and fats and grain are super cheap produce; meats and especially fruits and vegetables are more expensive and harder to package/preserve reliably for store shelves. Again, we are still individually responsible, each of us, for that choice- but the choice is made easy, even ubiquitous and irresistible. Consider that eating healthy has to even be an effort, that it requires great motivation to change those eating habits, and that IMO is a problem that overshadows mere individual decisions.
Yes, the media is partly to blame...
A great deal of television advertising tells us again and again to reach for that fast food or snack food- and we do. Surprise, surprise! So let me ask: either that advertising is effective in changing our behavior- hence the need to actually work hard to create a simply, healthy diet- or the tens, even hundreds of billions in advertising dollars spent each year to affect our behavior, our desires, our sense of what is important is a complete waste of money, and the biggest scam ever perpetrated on businesses. wasted money. Which scenario do you prefer? This is a critical point to remember: we can't just whitewash the media influence, not when so much money is spent to tell us that 5% body fat is desirable, yet tell us our lives will be more exciting and fun when we GO EXTREME! with the latest soda or snack chip. We're a materialist, consumerist society, and hundreds of billions of dollars are spent to reinforce this notion. So either businesses around this country are wasting a SHITLOAD of money for no reason, and advertisers are the latest snake-oil salesmen- or maybe, just maybe, those advertisers are effective at what they're doing, effective enough that Coca-Cola and McDonald's still feel the need to advertise persistently. Newsflash: they aren't still advertising because they worry someone might not have heard of their companies....
posted by hincandenza at 12:34 PM on October 9, 2001
The media isn't forcing you to down that soda, or candy bar. It's not forcing you to go to a movie instead of going for a walk or a run. The media isn't forcing you to do anything. Your own will is.
I don't give a damn how many billions in money is spend on advertising fast food. I bet if the same amount was spent on advertisting, lets say, carrots, I don't think the country would be any more healthy.
Let's face the facts - we like things that taste good. Things that taste good are also usualy bad for you. If you want to be healthy, try and avoid eating those things.
posted by SweetJesus at 1:37 PM on October 9, 2001
Oh, and please be so kind as to send me a photocopy of the final letter you write, thanks. I'll be looking forward to it- when did you say you were going to write it?
posted by hincandenza at 3:09 PM on October 9, 2001
posted by Aikido at 4:37 PM on October 9, 2001
And maybe you should towel off, as your last post was just dripping with sarcasm.
You can blame the media, and the goverment, and the guy at 7-11 down the street all you want, but until you look inward at yourself, you'll be blind to the facts of human nature.
posted by SweetJesus at 4:42 PM on October 9, 2001
posted by kindall at 4:48 PM on October 9, 2001
Totally off the topic so I apologize, but Native Alaskan's hate to be called "Eskimos." They prefer "Native".
And I've met some very attractive Yupik people.
Beauty is on the inside.
posted by culberjo at 5:07 PM on October 9, 2001
Amen, and getting back to the original topic, this is another problem with television. If I see that moron Martin Short in that fat suit, stuffing his face with donuts and pizza for laughs one more time, I will vomit. Nothing better to reinforce the idea that fat people are irresponsible, pathetic pigs than to show that, time and again, as humour.
And Rebecca, Camryn Manheim doesn't count -- the aforementioned David E. Kelley angle, one of two major producers (the other being Stephen Bochco, Kelley's mentor) that hires real-looking people to play real-playing characters.
posted by Dreama at 5:57 PM on October 9, 2001
Will this lead to a change in perceptions? I kinda doubt it.
posted by zeb vance at 8:29 PM on October 9, 2001
2.) "And maybe you should towel off, as your last post was just dripping with sarcasm"
I drip with sarcasm a lot. This is why I'm always nude when I sit at my computer- easier to mop myself up after I post.
3.) I was kidding about that, but it's still not something I needed to say... I'm sorry. :)
4.) "I saw a show on Eskimos... however the people I saw aesthetically did not appeal to me"
Seriously, I know this one stripper with huge bazoongas, and she bears an eerie resemblance for the pornstar Raylene. She's Aleut/Eskimo, and she's like totally major- league HOT. So there- just goes to show that Eskimos can be hotties too...
posted by hincandenza at 12:55 AM on October 10, 2001
Another point directed to the people who think that fatness isn't genetic: look around you. There aren't 'fat' people and 'thin' people. There are women with small breasts and wide hips, women with fat stomachs and skinny legs, thin men with fat stomachs, skinny straight women, skinny curvy women, short stocky men, tall weedy men etc etc etc. There's precious little you can do about your body type. If you have fat thighs you have fat thighs and that's it.
I read some research recently which suggested there was a certain weight your body was always heading towards and you could diet yourself away from it but your body would always be fighting to get back there in the form of cravings. For some people that weight is 110 pounds, for others its 170. That makes sense to me from my own experience. Like every other woman in the western world of every weight, I've been on a diet most of my life. I always slip back to the same weight but never go above it.
You diet for a while then the craving for fat and sugar gets so bad you give in. You feel like you're deprived, like you're not living a normal life because you're constantly hungry. No-one can blame you. Your body is working against you. Your body can never be sure when you're going to eat again. It doesn't know you live in a rich country with three supermarkets in the town centre. It thinks you're hunting for your food, therefore it overcompensates.
Last point. About the Reubenesque beauties of the 17th and 18th centuries. That sort of thing looks OK as depicted in oils or disguised by a floor length, cleavage-enhancing dress. Try looking at a 'larger lady' through a camera lens with cellulite and pallid flesh exposed and it's a different story. That's why I think thinness wasn't a virtue till photography was invented. TV is just an extension of that. Flesh-baring fashion is also a culprit.
posted by Summer at 4:47 AM on October 10, 2001
TV is a pop-culture looking-glass, a trailer-park Stargate - not a fuckin' mirror. We don't want to see actors sporting facial melanoma, and we don't want to see fat people. And since TV's influence seems only strong enough to dent a few wobbly self-esteems, and not strong enough to compel sustained recuperative action, it is obviously not a relevant source of motivation.
I guess I should mention that I am svelte, and can eat whatever I want, whenever I want, and not gain an ounce. This, of course, has no bearing on my opinions...
posted by Opus Dark at 5:26 AM on October 10, 2001
>dollars in advertising have no effect whatsoever. Then I
I'd have to agree... If advertising doesn't truly work, doesn't truly affect the way we think, and affect our actions, why is it there?
I mean, c'mon, if reading a book, attending a class, listening to a speech can affect your actions, concious thoughts and subconcious, 30+ hours per week of TV, radio, printed, online media MUST HAVE SOME FORM OF IMPACT.
Face it, absolute free will is something of an illusion. Was it not George Carlin who stated: "we have 180 different kinds of breakfast cereal, and 2 political parties...". Your thinking is conditioned by the way you were raised by family, your culture, your education, your media intake, your diet, your income, your electrical & chemical brain input/activity. Recent studies show that we are affected strongly by subconcious pheromones... Wonderful? Advertisers are already there, with special devices that mist stores with certain combinations of scent... You smell a nice perfume in the store, but within it, it's loaded with pheromones.
Get a clue. Yes there is free will, ultimately there is the choice to not eat the twinky. But how many people are simply on "auto-pilot". Hell, even the sweat at the gym, eat only whole grain breads crew are mostly on "auto-pilot", simply following a different herd.
Fucking sheep.
posted by jkaczor at 1:43 PM on October 15, 2001
« Older Anthrax | B61-11 tactical micro-nuke headed for Afghanistan? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
If 3% of TV characters are overweight, and 90% are average or underweight...
where the heck are the other 7%??
Ditto for "real life:" if one in four (25%) is overweight, and half (50%) are average or underweight, what are the remaining 25%?
I smell a pantload. Here's a better question: do these studies reflect anything other than made-up bullshit?
posted by UncleFes at 9:09 PM on October 8, 2001