All I can say is "wow"

[ReginaW]

Fat bastards
Today’s Americans have as much lard between their ears as on their flabby butts

By Jaime O'Neill

America, you're really starting to creep me out—big time. Make that huge time. Everywhere you congregate, I’m overwhelmed by how overwhelming you’ve become. Fat was once considered funny: from Fatty Arbuckle to Oliver Hardy to Jackie Gleason to Fat Albert, we laughed at the idea of people with enhanced poundage. Some even found humor in the frenzied, repulsive and ultimately pathetic Chris Farley.

But fat’s not funny anymore, not given the sheer number of fat people thundering through America’s malls and markets. As Alfred Hitchcock understood, even things that are benign in small numbers become creepy en masse. Little birdies are cute—even sweet—but when the flock blots out the sun, it’s creepy.

And that’s how it’s become with fat people. You’re everywhere these days, people of a size once found only in tents where yokels paid a quarter to gawk at them. You’re not just fat; you’re huge, ponderous, beyond jumbo, a vast and undulating formidability of flesh, an avalanche of avoirdupois, a devolution of the species back to a future of protoplasmic balloon creatures.

You’re becoming a living metaphor for the way the United States is viewed by much of the rest of the planet: a rapacious, gluttonous, insatiable nation of swine, the Pig People of North America, the fat neighbors who are fouling the whole neighborhood, consuming everything in sight, and strewing waste in your wake. According to figures from the U.S. Department of Energy, each person in the United States consumes twice as much energy as Germans, 12 times that of Colombians, and almost 30 times the consumption of India’s citizens. For each American’s consumption, 127 Haitians or 395 Ethiopians could consume away.

The United States leads the world, by far, in carbon-dioxide emissions and in water and oil consumption. We have the largest houses in the world. Each year, the average American generates 189 pounds of food waste, 183 pounds of plastic trash, 570 pounds of paper trash and 86 pounds of glass trash.

And we’re the most obese nation in the world. Rates of obesity have doubled during the time George W. Bush has been president. I’m not making that up. Check the stats put out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Just visit any county fair throughout the land. Obesity in adults has increased by 60 percent in the past 20 years and has tripled in children over the past 30 years. The kids at those county fairs are often porkier than the comparatively sleek pigs in the FFA stalls.

Lots of those obese people deal with it by purchasing electric carts to haul themselves around in. You’d think when you’d gotten too damn fat to walk, that fact might be a wake-up call, a message from God or just an indication that something is a little out of whack in the old lifestyle department, but the message lots of Americans take from the confabulation of flab is that it’s time to motorize the motion.

In the not-so-long run, that combination of inactivity, sugar and super-sized portions of greasy, salt-filled foods will kill us, but we might as well ride easy on the way to that early grave. Obesity-related deaths now have climbed to more than 300,000 a year—second only to deaths from tobacco-related diseases.

Seeing those stats in the full and bounteous flesh, out in public, strolling in herds and swelling the size of crowds is, as I say, beginning to creep me out. Contemporary America begins to look more and more like that old movie, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, in which aliens take over the bodies of earthlings, exact replicas of the people whose identities they assume, but minus feelings and emotions. In Body Snatcher: 2007, however, the aliens have snatched the bodies of normal Americans and made them unable to wedge themselves into most public seating or, if able to sit, completely unable to extract their bloated butts from those no-longer-adequately-sized seats once their full weight has spread and settled.

Fat, dumb and ugly is not the image most Americans have of themselves—or their nation—but until or unless we shape up, that’s pretty much the reality.

And shaping up won’t simply be a matter of signing on for weight training or signing off from all that fast-food super-sizing and high-in-sugar-and-carbs convenience food. We’re going to have to get a whole lot less lazy and actually look at what is being done to us. That means taking the time to get better informed, not only about what we’re shoving into our faces, but also about what is being shoved into the minds of our children and down our throats by our politicians, most of whom long since ceased working for us and turned their energies over to serving their corporate masters.

We’re going to have to become Americans again: people who demand the kind of pay that allows us to harvest our own crops and work in our own factories. Shaping up means losing the mental flab that has us tuned in like automatons to American Idol, the latest adventures of Lindsay Lohan and the bimbo brigade, or any of those other Romanesque circuses that make us slack-jawed consumers of whatever swill the media moguls pump into our brains.

The fat on our bodies is simply the external manifestation of the fat that infects the national spirit—the corruption of our most sacred institutions, the incompetence of our public servants, the erosion of our civil liberties and the apathy that weighs us all down like a double Whopper with cheese.

Fat, dumb and ugly: We’re fat because we’re either too dumb or too lazy to either watch what we put in our mouths or take the trouble to inform ourselves of the high-fructose corn syrup added to nearly everything marketed as “convenience” food. As a result, we grow increasingly ugly, allowing our nation to be redefined by the corporations rather than own our politicians. We’ve grown so bovine in mind and body that we may be getting the representation we deserve, especially since a majority of us don’t even bother to vote, and an even bigger majority exercise as little effort informing themselves about who and what we’re voting for as we do about the food we’re stuffing in our mouths.

Our heritage requires of us, as citizens, that we be more than a nation of overstuffed swine wallowing in the mud of our laziness and indifference. We must reclaim our bodies and our minds from those who’ve snatched them from us. If we can regain our bodies and our minds, maybe we can regain our country, too.


Link to Article (http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/Content?oid=344915)

[Rheneas]

Why doesn't he say what he really thinks.....

[leslieam]

This article makes me sick. :mad: I suppose this idoit thinks this type of article is going to shape up America. Makes me wanna go out and run laps, lemme tell you.....

[Dodger]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. He must be a believer in tough love.

[Daisymaiz]

Swine, huh?? Totally unnecessary. :thdown:

[kyrasdad]

Notice that he gets the underpinnings right: sugar and carbs. I doubt he thinks this screed will motivate anyone, but parts of it are dead-on. We're a society that exists on mental and physical sugar in lots of ways. I don't think we are in as dark a place as he thinks, but lots of it is undoubtedly true.

[Nancy LC]

I think he scored a few touche's. I was just listening to something on NPR how global warming and obesity are linked. I kind of scoffed at first, but see they're actually on target.

[Atrsy]

While this article seems a little over the edge, he does make some good points. I have noticed myself that people I see when I'm out are much, much larger than when I was younger.

I used to think that Kate Smith and Edith Bunker were fat! Now when I see photos of them, I realize that they weren't all that big in comparison with most people today.

I'm old enough to remember when every family had a vegetable garden. You didn't buy snack foods--my sisters used to make fudge or potato chips on Saturday night as a family treat. The only time we had soda in the house was for a special occasion or if someone was ill.

It really bothers me to go out to eat and see toddlers drinking coke with their meals. Kids nowdays won't even touch water!

So, I think this man has made some very important observations. We need to stop and look at where this world is going. It is our responsiblilty to change things. As Al Gore says, if each of us would just change our light bulbs to compact flourescent we could impact global warning Likewise, if we would stop buying processed foods, we would all be slimmer.

Instead of looking at this type of writer as kooks, we should stop and see exactly what they are trying to tell us.

[kneebrace]

So, I think this man has made some very important observations. We need to stop and look at where this world is going. It is our responsiblilty to change things. As Al Gore says, if each of us would just change our light bulbs to compact flourescent we could impact global warning Likewise, if we would stop buying processed foods, we would all be slimmer.

Instead of looking at this type of writer as kooks, we should stop and see exactly what they are trying to tell us.

I'm amazed at the negative comments about this article. Sure, the truth hurts. And it's always easier to shoot the messengers who don't dress it up and make it somebody else's fault. He doesn't pull any punches, it's true.

But IMHO, unpalatable as the points he makes might be, he's right.
..and George Bush ought to be ashamed of himself ;) .

Stuart

[southbel]

Honestly, I was just impressed he didn't blame it on fat and would have wasted all that satirical repose on calling for us to adopt the same lame low-fat dogma that hasn't worked for so very long. So, in all, I have to say that I didn't disagree with this article. I would say that it certainly wasn't written to "comfort" us but it was definitely on point with the carbs, sugars, and processed foods components of the article!

[MandalayVA]

I love someone that doesn't pull any punches, and this guy definitely doesn't. Thanks for posting this, Regina.

[Daisymaiz]

Yes we all need to take responsibility for our choices, but insulting and attacking people in that way often does more harm than good, IMO.

[2bthinner!]

Fat, dumb and ugly: We’re fat because we’re either too dumb or too lazy to either watch what we put in our mouths or take the trouble to inform ourselves of the high-fructose corn syrup added to nearly everything marketed as “convenience” food..

A lot of people make the mistake of listening to their doctor. I agree it's a mistake, but I don't think it's appropriate to call someone dumb or lazy for it. Many people still respect the education the doctor is "supposed" to have.

And personally, I'm neither dumb nor lazy, and I'm following a low carb diet. Yet, I'm still fat. Obviously there's some other problem I'm missing. I don't think that makes me dumb or lazy. It can be very elusive.

our laziness and indifference Actually, this is rather reminiscent of another article that was in the war zone. A woman wrote it. That women who dieted were vain, shallow, etc...

[kaypeeoh]

I'm surprised there wasn't more support for the article. After all, the writer is correct. We Americans are the world's biggest consumers of energy and calories. We are fat and lazy. We want easy fixes. We don't want to push away from the table. We don't want to walk anywhere. Vacations mean sitting on the beach, not swimming in the ocean.

[KvonM]

*wiping away a tear* i think i'm going to engrave the author's name on the handle of the squeeky hammer of doom™.

[MizKitty]

It's too bad all the insults he hurls in the first half of the article obscure the good points he makes in the second half of the article.

You really do catch more flies with honey.

[Dodger]

You really do catch more flies with honey.That assumes that you want to catch flies in the first place. Kind of like the early bird and the worm. If you don't want a worm, then you can sleep late.

[iluvribeye]

Personally, I agree with some of the criticisms regarding America. I and many of my fellow Americans are to blame for the way the world perceives us. I could say more, but then we'd have to move the discussion to the "war zone".

[rightnow]

We don't want to walk anywhere.
In Europe people walk everywhere because everything is relatively close. Mass transit is a given. You can get on a train and go through several countries (yes, countries) in a day or so. You can stay in youth hostels that are super affordable. And it's standard that everyone has summer off for vacation. The population is very dense for the most part, and many of the 'houses' amount to what we'd call apartments and flats here, many together.

When I have lived in areas that had houses and stores close together and decently dense population (like Greenwood area in Seattle WA), I walked. I dragged the baby and stroller down three flights of steps and walked all over that area. But not beyond that because beyond that was not walkable. Now, where I live, I can walk to the gas station, a tiny grocery that I don't much use as they are limited and high priced, or several fast food places (my friend jokes that for me they're so close they are 'crawl-through' windows), but that's it. I don't walk much because stuff isn't close enough for me to easily walk to. Now, if I had grown up and spent my life walking to most stuff, and hence was in shape to walk quite a bit at this point in my life, maybe my definition of what is within walking distance would be different.

My ex is from Czechoslovakia, and walking, biking and occasional train is how he got anywhere. He didn't even know how to drive and he's in his 50s. This certainly does support the idea that in many other countries, people walk much more than they do in this one.

However, please consider as an example,you can fit the entire United Kingdom, all its countries, into about 2/3 of california. People often don't realize the sheer scope of how HUGE the united states is -- and how incredibly "spread out" most of our communities are. In many countries, having a car is a luxury. In most of America that is not deeply inner city, having a car is totally required if you expect to get to work. Mass transit barely exists here and sucks, except again in the most densely populated areas -- which would make them more similar to much of Europe.

My point is that space differences are a huge factor behind why people in most other countries walk vastly more than Americans do. It is not that we are all operating under identical conditions, and europeans go, "Oh hey, I'd love to walk" and Americans go, "No, I'm too lazy to walk". It's that many europeans don't have cars, gas is insanely expensive when they do, mass transit is available and cheap (and requires a little regular walking to get to the stop/etc. of course), and most things ARE within walking distance for them. In America gas is (well, used to be lol) affordable, mass transit totally sucks most the time when it exists at all, most everything you need to reach is definitely too far to walk to unless you're in great shape (and enjoy carrying 9 grocery sacks of stuff on your walk), and so most people own and constantly use cars.

I consider it a difference in 'conditions', not in 'laziness factor'. Though of course this condition alone, over the course of time, may contribute to less physical fitness and what we might call a laziness factor.

[kyrasdad]

Rightnow has it right. We live in the same general part of Oklahoma, and going car-less is pretty much impossible here--and, I suspect a vast majority of the United States.

Then again, we haven't always been as obese a country as we are now. The structural differences between us and Europe don't account for everything.

[rightnow]

True, but the data on increased obesity is only collected for the US. For all we know, it's a similar increase in europe as well. The data doesn't exist to compare.

[HairOnFire]

Wow, he hit a home run. This is a very accurate description of many Americans. Sad, really.

[kebaldwin]

Bad behaviors are a by product of success.

Now that the rest of the world has copied our lifestyles - their bad behaviors - as defined in this article - are rising exponentially.

As America shrinks - so will her bad behaviors.

By dwelling on them we signal that our growth upward is over. You can see many previous empires with the same model.

[HappyLC]

Wow! I can't believe that anyone, especially here on a weightloss forum, would applaud or even defend this piece of vile, hate-filled "journalism".

Just when did it become okay to describe any group of people using words like:

repulsive
creepy
rapacious
gluttonous
swine
pig people
porky
strolling in herds
dumb
ugly
lazy

Everyone here is, or was (and possibly will be again, if weight regain statistics are to be believed) FAT. Were all of you fat because you were stupid, lazy, insatiable, rapacious, gluttonous, etc., etc.? If you get fat again, as do the great majority of those who lose, will it be because you suddenly decided to go back to being dumb and lazy?

It doesn't matter if the author understands that carbs and sugar cause weight gain. It doesn't matter if you agree with his brand of politics (any discussion of which does not belong in this thread). This piece was simply an excuse for the author to vent his hatred of fat people...the last remaining acceptable prejudice.

This nasty piece of crap just gives people more reasons to hate those whose appearance they find unacceptable. Jerks who hurl insults at fat people will feel even more justified in their abuse by this type of article.

A couple of questions -

Is everyone capable of being the "right" size?

Can you tell by looking at a fat person why they're fat?

Should those with "acceptable" medical reasons for being overweight wear signs that will exempt them from abuse by strangers?

And what size is too big to be acceptable, or to deserve being insulted and dehumanized like this?

I saw a blog recently that posted pictures of Kelly Clarkson, surely far from obese, which called her a fat pig and said she should stop stuffing her face. And that's increasingly okay to do, because of jerks like Jaime O'Neill.

Edited to add: My bad. That blogger did not call Kelly Clarkson a fat pig and say she should stop stuffing her face. He called her a hippo, and suggested she should have thrown up the hot dogs she ate. Check it out. (http://darkhat.blogspot.com/2006/04/kelly-clarkson-is-good-at-eating-hot.html)

One more question. Would she have deserved that treatment if she weighed 200 pounds? 300? Does anybody deserve to be treated like that? How is this different from the name-calling in the article in the original post?

[kaypeeoh]

It doesn't matter if the author understands that carbs and sugar cause weight gain. It doesn't matter if you agree with his brand of politics (any discussion of which does not belong in this thread). This piece was simply an excuse for the author to vent his hatred of fat people...the last remaining acceptable prejudice.


Like former smokers or addicts, the author probably was once obese and got control over his appetite. Fear of regaining the lost weight could explain his vitriol. So you don't disagree with his position, just his un-pc presentation?

[HappyLC]

Like former smokers or addicts, the author probably was once obese and got control over his appetite. Fear of regaining the lost weight could explain his vitriol. So you don't disagree with his position, just his un-pc presentation?

I'm not quite sure what his position is. I don't think the message can be separated from the presentation. I think they're one and the same. His position seems to be that fat people are disgusting, lazy, over-consumers. So no, I don't agree with that. There are reasons why people are overweight, and they are varied and complex. Obesity is only beginning to be understood. And we're talking about people. People cannot be objectified, dehumanized and destroyed with words, just because you're "creeped out" by the way they look. (That was the general "you", not you, kaypeeoh.)

[KvonM]

It doesn't matter if the author understands that carbs and sugar cause weight gain. It doesn't matter if you agree with his brand of politics (any discussion of which does not belong in this thread). This piece was simply an excuse for the author to vent his hatred of fat people...the last remaining acceptable prejudice.

This nasty piece of crap just gives people more reasons to hate those whose appearance they find unacceptable. Jerks who hurl insults at fat people will feel even more justified in their abuse by this type of article.
i honestly didn't get this vibe from the author. the underlying message i received was "look america, wise up and stop looking to the government to tell you what to put in your mouth. use a little common sense and realize what price you're paying for convenience in food." and while i did get the sense that the author probably hasn't had much of a weight problem throughout his life, i also get the sense that he's not one of these eternally fit, muscle-bound twits that ignores the fact that genetics graced him with a body that doesn't store fat at the drop of a carb. he, like many of us, knows that what may work for him may not work for someone else, but the dogma of "grains rule and fat drools!" isn't getting us anywhere other than larger.

i think the key statement is here...
The fat on our bodies is simply the external manifestation of the fat that infects the national spirit—the corruption of our most sacred institutions, the incompetence of our public servants, the erosion of our civil liberties and the apathy that weighs us all down like a double Whopper with cheese.
in other words, we truly are what we eat.

[HappyLC]

i honestly didn't get this vibe from the author.

I can't believe we read the same article.

[ysabella]

Like former smokers or addicts, the author probably was once obese and got control over his appetite. Fear of regaining the lost weight could explain his vitriol. So you don't disagree with his position, just his un-pc presentation?

It wasn't "un-pc." It's PC to spew frothing invective all over as long as you're talking about fat people, lately. The author is a community-college English teacher and obviously enjoys crafting his insulting wordplay. Invective is all about bringing lots of attention to something. In this case, the "something" is a very low-quality essay equating fat with political apathy.

Strangely, the essay touches on something like strikes/trade unions ("demand the kind of pay that allows us to harvest our own crops and work in our own factories" - does that mean less pay, or more? Maybe both, since he probably thinks we should make more but pay union dues), anti-corporation-ism ("As a result, we grow increasingly ugly, allowing our nation to be redefined by the corporations rather than own our politicians" as well as "our politicians, most of whom long since ceased working for us and turned their energies over to serving their corporate masters") and anti-celeb-gossip ("Romanesque circuses that make us slack-jawed consumers of whatever swill the media moguls pump into our brains").

He's intimating that somehow, corporations and politicians are colluding to force us to be apathetic and fat. The gossip columnists, I suppose, are a part of the power structure, but he does not elaborate. Anyway, we powerlessly absorb it and so do our children ("what is being shoved into the minds of our children and down our throats by our politicians"). He also suggests that fat people are also dumb and/or lazy. He says we should stop it, wise up, slim down, etc. because it will make America better, and he suggests how to do it, how to throw off the yoke of...whatever it is. Politicians and corporations, I guess. It isn't shaping up - "shaping up won’t simply be a matter of signing on for weight training or signing off from all that fast-food super-sizing and high-in-sugar-and-carbs convenience food" - it's basically adopting his personal political beliefs that will save us. Because if we saw it the way he sees it, we would suddenly boldly change things and become slim at the same time. I'm not sure how, perahps by writing strongly-worded articles.

Also, lots of generalizations that imply he's never actually gone to other countries and found out what people think of Americans. But it's clear he thinks Americans are too lazy to have gone and found that out for themselves, so he can just make it up, right?

[rightnow]

It isn't shaping up - "shaping up won’t simply be a matter of signing on for weight training or signing off from all that fast-food super-sizing and high-in-sugar-and-carbs convenience food" - it's basically adopting his personal political beliefs that will save us.
'bout as reasonable as equating religion with fitness, I suppose.

My kid is chubby. I would like to blame it on my state governor, but he is unfortunately touring flooded areas to declare them disaster areas for FEMA assistance. Prior to that he was working his ass off on a variety of economic issues needing dealing with. He will be glad to know that he is personally responsible for my kid's health. I feel much better that apparently this is not my responsibility, and that merely avoiding bad food and increasing exercise isn't really what being healthier is about. For a minute I thought I was the one feeding my kid and myself.

[ysabella]

But, rightnow, surely he comes over to your house and shoves things down your child's throat. You just aren't noticing and you need newspaper columnists to sound the wakeup call!

[rightnow]

Damn liberals. Everything else is their fault, why not the size of my kid's butt? :lol:


(I am JOKING you guys. No political defense needed lol.)

[KvonM]

I can't believe we read the same article.
maybe it's just because my attitude and approach tends to be more along the lines of the author's that i can see past the insults and get the real message. that article was borne of frustration and anger, not spite, arrogance, or sneering disgust. it's a tough-love approach, and like all tough-love approaches you have to get past the presentation. just because a diamond ring is housed in an old matchbox and wrapped with the sunday funnies doesn't make it any less valuable, and wrapping a dog turd in a tiffany box doesn't make it smell any better.

it's basically adopting his personal political beliefs that will save us. Because if we saw it the way he sees it, we would suddenly boldly change things and become slim at the same time. I'm not sure how, perahps by writing strongly-worded articles.
'bout as reasonable as equating religion with fitness, I suppose....

For a minute I thought I was the one feeding my kid and myself.
side note: forgive me for the liberties i took with quoting... it was relevant to my point.
pj, i think you and ysabella are actually on the same page here even if you're on different paragraphs... what i got was that the author wants US to take responsibility for what we eat and how we eat it. maybe not by exactly adopting his specific mindset, but by utilizing our own intelligence rather than letting anyone else tell us what we should or shouldn't put in our mouths. we're already there because of the manner in which we've adopted low-carbing as our lifestyle (doing the research, tweaking where necessary, understanding WHY we eat what we eat and the effect it has on our bodies). it's getting the rest of the country to get their brains in gear as well that's the problem, and hopefully getting smarter about what we eat and why will open doors to getting smarter about everything else in our lives, our communities, and our nation.

[rightnow]

Actually I agree that the food and health problems are promoted at a governmental level due to the mis/dis information, conflict of interest with corporatism and medical school/pharma etc.

But most people have a hard enough time changing what they eat for dinner. Asking people to essentially change the world, change the larger picture of the country, stuff frankly none of us can really affect, does sort of make the get-healthy effort seem a little more complicated.

I was responding mostly to one line in Ysa's quote:
"shaping up won’t simply be a matter of signing on for weight training or signing off from all that fast-food super-sizing and high-in-sugar-and-carbs convenience food

Actually I think health can only happen with the individual, and that this is exactly what each individual probably needs to do.

Now if we are talking about shaping up a COUNTRY, that is a lofty and lovely idea and ideal.

But I'm lucky to make it through most days without screwing up anything of great importance; the ability to determine the health and welfare of my entire country is something I consider a little out of my grasp.

My one day at a time, no-McJunkfood-for-me-mom approach is changing only my tiny corner (ok, rather large corner in my case) of the world but I think health, like charity, starts at home.

[keywstdame]

This author can take his "tough-love" and stick it where the sun don't shine! I read the article and I don't think I need an interpreter to explain it to me. I "got" his message and I didn't like the way it was presented. There are better ways to get that message across and it is not by degrading fat people.

[HappyLC]

It wasn't "un-pc." It's PC to spew frothing invective all over as long as you're talking about fat people, lately. The author is a community-college English teacher and obviously enjoys crafting his insulting wordplay. Invective is all about bringing lots of attention to something. In this case, the "something" is a very low-quality essay equating fat with political apathy.

Strangely, the essay touches on something like strikes/trade unions ("demand the kind of pay that allows us to harvest our own crops and work in our own factories" - does that mean less pay, or more? Maybe both, since he probably thinks we should make more but pay union dues), anti-corporation-ism ("As a result, we grow increasingly ugly, allowing our nation to be redefined by the corporations rather than own our politicians" as well as "our politicians, most of whom long since ceased working for us and turned their energies over to serving their corporate masters") and anti-celeb-gossip ("Romanesque circuses that make us slack-jawed consumers of whatever swill the media moguls pump into our brains").

He's intimating that somehow, corporations and politicians are colluding to force us to be apathetic and fat. The gossip columnists, I suppose, are a part of the power structure, but he does not elaborate. Anyway, we powerlessly absorb it and so do our children ("what is being shoved into the minds of our children and down our throats by our politicians"). He also suggests that fat people are also dumb and/or lazy. He says we should stop it, wise up, slim down, etc. because it will make America better, and he suggests how to do it, how to throw off the yoke of...whatever it is. Politicians and corporations, I guess. It isn't shaping up - "shaping up won’t simply be a matter of signing on for weight training or signing off from all that fast-food super-sizing and high-in-sugar-and-carbs convenience food" - it's basically adopting his personal political beliefs that will save us. Because if we saw it the way he sees it, we would suddenly boldly change things and become slim at the same time. I'm not sure how, perahps by writing strongly-worded articles.

Also, lots of generalizations that imply he's never actually gone to other countries and found out what people think of Americans. But it's clear he thinks Americans are too lazy to have gone and found that out for themselves, so he can just make it up, right?

Exactly. You've got this guy's number. (I had to quote the whole post because I couldn't find any sections that I could delete.)

Actually, now that I think of it, what does this mean -

We’re going to have to become Americans again: people who demand the kind of pay that allows us to harvest our own crops and work in our own factories.

[HappyLC]

...not...sneering disgust.

"You’re not just fat; you’re huge, ponderous, beyond jumbo, a vast and undulating formidability of flesh, an avalanche of avoirdupois, a devolution of the species back to a future of protoplasmic balloon creatures."


If that's not "sneering disgust", I don't know what is.

[MandalayVA]

maybe it's just because my attitude and approach tends to be more along the lines of the author's that i can see past the insults and get the real message. that article was borne of frustration and anger, not spite, arrogance, or sneering disgust. it's a tough-love approach, and like all tough-love approaches you have to get past the presentation. just because a diamond ring is housed in an old matchbox and wrapped with the sunday funnies doesn't make it any less valuable, and wrapping a dog turd in a tiffany box doesn't make it smell any better.


That's another problem too--America doesn't like the tough love approach. They want to be told that whatever's wrong isn't their fault and have a ready scapegoat provided. Yes, portions at restaurants have gotten huge, but that doesn't mean you have to eat the whole thing. Unless you're being tied down and force-fed, only you decide what and how much goes in your mouth. There's always a choice. I got fat because I chose to eat crappy food and not exercise. It's not the government's fault, it's not my family's fault, it's not my genetics' fault, it's not my thyroid's fault, it's not my metabolism's fault. It's MY fault and I accept that.

[rightnow]

I actually didn't read the article till now LOL -- I was just responding to Ysa's quotes.

(As an aside to a couple others, there is great dispute about the existence of global warming, no matter how enormously popular a political-media tool it has become. No more on that, this isn't a political forum, but just in case nobody realized that, like the food pyramid, it actually is in question, I thought I'd mention it.)

On the article --

I agree I see more way-fat people than I used to. Hey! I'm one of them! Oh man. Ritual suicide is clearly the only answer.

It is no secret that America is the largest consumer of nearly everything.

If America ate more protein instead of the 'food pyramid' we'd ingest a zillion times less food. AND be thinner. I don't believe that is because the entire nation is stupid, I believe it's because the entire nation is pointedly mis/dis educated about food. That, yes, I will agree to blame on government, however, education or not, the bottom line is individual choice. Every person I know, without exception, knows that boxed frozen fast food sucks and real food and water is better, but nothing more than individual choice determines how they eat, regardless of that education or its lack.

About halfway through he starts getting to some actual points, some of which are eh, ok, I'm not really in disagreement.

Unfortunately his nearly fetishist obsession with the overwhelming horror of fat people so overwhelms the article, that I feel less inclined to get healthy suddenly, than I do to suggest he seek therapy. The tone -- his deliberately poetically horrific prose about fat people -- is so extreme that one can almost picture this guy standing frozen in walmart with his eyes the size of a cartoon character and bugged out as fat people walk by. After which he would fall gasping against the candy shelf, loosen his tie frantically, and sweating in horror, dash outside and collapse under the trauma of the morbidly obese Wal-mart greeter's goodbye, bellowing to the waddling incoming pedestrians, SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!

Well ok. Maybe that's a little exaggerated, but so was his article. :lol:

[rightnow]

I actually DO like the 'tough love' approach in nearly every aspect of life.

My version of tough love is: Hey! Let's get our shit together and make this happen! Here's what we should do to be really proactive, work together and individually, and kick ass on it! No excuses, no procrastination, no blame, just do it!

His version of tough love is: Oh my god I'm surrounded by the most disgusting people in the universe, it's almost too much to bear, it's just a mirror for the misery and wrongness in our whole country, the PAIN, THE PAINNNNN (sorry, Star Trek flashback), something must be DONE!

I like my version better.

[keywstdame]

My version of tough love is: Hey! Let's get our shit together and make this happen! Here's what we should do to be really proactive, work together and individually, and kick ass on it! No excuses, no procrastination, no blame, just do it!

His version of tough love is: Oh my god I'm surrounded by the most disgusting people in the universe, it's almost too much to bear, it's just a mirror for the misery and wrongness in our whole country, the PAIN, THE PAINNNNN (sorry, Star Trek flashback), something must be DONE!

I like my version better.[/QUOTE]

Atta girl rightnow!

[ysabella]

maybe it's just because my attitude and approach tends to be more along the lines of the author's that i can see past the insults and get the real message. that article was borne of frustration and anger, not spite, arrogance, or sneering disgust. it's a tough-love approach, and like all tough-love approaches you have to get past the presentation. just because a diamond ring is housed in an old matchbox and wrapped with the sunday funnies doesn't make it any less valuable, and wrapping a dog turd in a tiffany box doesn't make it smell any better.
Show me one nugget of love in that article!


side note: forgive me for the liberties i took with quoting... it was relevant to my point.
pj, i think you and ysabella are actually on the same page here even if you're on different paragraphs...
Oh, I think she and I are on the same page. Also both in a snarky mood. :D

what i got was that the author wants US to take responsibility for what we eat and how we eat it. maybe not by exactly adopting his specific mindset, but by utilizing our own intelligence rather than letting anyone else tell us what we should or shouldn't put in our mouths.
I don't get that. If we're so intelligent, how are celeb "circuses" and politicians stealing our life force from us, and shoving things down our throats?

we're already there because of the manner in which we've adopted low-carbing as our lifestyle (doing the research, tweaking where necessary, understanding WHY we eat what we eat and the effect it has on our bodies). it's getting the rest of the country to get their brains in gear as well that's the problem, and hopefully getting smarter about what we eat and why will open doors to getting smarter about everything else in our lives, our communities, and our nation.
Low-carbing has put a valuable tool in my toolbox, but it hasn't made me thin. I don't eat HFCS and I lift weights, but as he says, that's not enough. So according to this guy, I'm somehow slack-jawed and apathetic, and that's really my problem.

[KvonM]

"You’re not just fat; you’re huge, ponderous, beyond jumbo, a vast and undulating formidability of flesh, an avalanche of avoirdupois, a devolution of the species back to a future of protoplasmic balloon creatures."


If that's not "sneering disgust", I don't know what is.
see, i took that with a healthy dose of sarcasm... i've been known to write in the same way, creating incredibly extensive situations and descriptions in order to insert an element of the absurd into my statement. it helps differentiate my annoyed-about-something writing from my hell-hath-no-fury-like-this-succubus/banshee-scorned writing. but again, this is just me and my perceptions.

Actually I think health can only happen with the individual, and that this is exactly what each individual probably needs to do.... My one day at a time, no-McJunkfood-for-me-mom approach is changing only my tiny corner (ok, rather large corner in my case) of the world but I think health, like charity, starts at home.
i think that's the underlying point. solve what's wrong with each of us, individually, solve the problems of what we feed our families, concentrate on ourselves rather than on everyone else's problems. on some levels it seems selfish, but we can't justify fixing the rest of the world if we can't live up to the examples we're trying to push on others.

pj, you're making the kind of impact he's talking about with your daughter. you work with her, you work on yourself, and you're smart enough to know which are the good choices and which are the bad. my mom did the same with me.

[KvonM]

Actually, now that I think of it, what does this mean -

We’re going to have to become Americans again: people who demand the kind of pay that allows us to harvest our own crops and work in our own factories.
it means we need to take pride in american products again. we need to stop sending manufacturing out to other countries and stop hiring call-center employees in new delhi just because corporations want to cut costs on employee labor. corporate execs would rather see 5-digit bonus checks every quarter than provide more jobs for the surrounding community.

it boils down to taking responsibility for ourselves and not claiming that everyone else is to blame.

[ysabella]

it means we need to take pride in american products again. we need to stop sending manufacturing out to other countries and stop hiring call-center employees in new delhi just because corporations want to cut costs on employee labor. corporate execs would rather see 5-digit bonus checks every quarter than provide more jobs for the surrounding community.
I didn't get that quite the same way. "Demanding the kind of pay" speaks to me directly of collective bargaining and striking, which usually means unions.

it boils down to taking responsibility for ourselves and not claiming that everyone else is to blame.
I disagree. He is putting blame on fat people, saying they are apathetic and dragging the nation down. I think it was supposed to be a metaphor, but he dressed it up with all the insults so much it was obfuscated.

[scthgharpy]

Oh I support the article. He took the words out of my mouth. And Im a vet. Thank god Im not STILL in the service, I dont know how those kids find us worthy enough to fight for.

[KvonM]

Show me one nugget of love in that article!
here... "We’re going to have to get a whole lot less lazy and actually look at what is being done to us. That means taking the time to get better informed, not only about what we’re shoving into our faces, but also about what is being shoved into the minds of our children and down our throats by our politicians, most of whom long since ceased working for us and turned their energies over to serving their corporate masters."

and here... "Shaping up means losing the mental flab that has us tuned in like automatons to American Idol, the latest adventures of Lindsay Lohan and the bimbo brigade, or any of those other Romanesque circuses that make us slack-jawed consumers of whatever swill the media moguls pump into our brains."

and here... "Our heritage requires of us, as citizens, that we be more than a nation of overstuffed swine wallowing in the mud of our laziness and indifference. We must reclaim our bodies and our minds from those who’ve snatched them from us. If we can regain our bodies and our minds, maybe we can regain our country, too."

now i'll happily concede that the article wasn't on the same level as some of the tough-love beatings i've handed out with the squeeky hammer of doom™, because those have always had a sense of "i WANT you to SUCCEED!" to them. i think what the author is giving is "here's what we need to do to succeed, so stop being idiots and DO IT."


I don't get that. If we're so intelligent, how are celeb "circuses" and politicians stealing our life force from us, and shoving things down our throats?
because we've given up. we've become far too preoccupied with reality tv, with politicians who tell us what we want to hear and then go off and do whatever they want to do with no consequences whatsoever, with some unattainable societal "norm" that makes us too busy running from pillar to post to think straight. rather than thinking for ourselves and standing up for what we believe in, it's just so much easier to let someone else take the lead and tell us what to eat, what to wear, what to think. and once you give up, you give your authority figure of choice the power to do whatever he or she wants to do to you.


Low-carbing has put a valuable tool in my toolbox, but it hasn't made me thin. I don't eat HFCS and I lift weights, but as he says, that's not enough. So according to this guy, I'm somehow slack-jawed and apathetic, and that's really my problem.
again, i didn't quite get that from the article. i don't think he's equating "thin" by the standards of the fashion industry with "fit and healthy."

now keep in mind, and this does go for everyone reading the thread, i tend to glean much more from written material than just the surface words. for someone who's adept at reading people, both by what they say and do AND by the vibe they give off, i see beneath the words.

[rightnow]

i see beneath the words.
I love that Kvon. Next time I spend paragraphs extravagantly insulting and offending an entire class of people, I will ask you to come explain it to the people who took it wrong. No matter what I say, it's what I mean that matters. I totally get this.

P.S. Bring the hammer.

[KvonM]

I didn't get that quite the same way. "Demanding the kind of pay" speaks to me directly of collective bargaining and striking, which usually means unions.
i do agree that the phrase wasn't the best choice, and i think he missed the confusion when editing.


I disagree. He is putting blame on fat people, saying they are apathetic and dragging the nation down. I think it was supposed to be a metaphor, but he dressed it up with all the insults so much it was obfuscated.
the way i saw it, he's saying obesity of the body is a physiological symptom indicating apathy of the mind. it's the difference between saying "you're stupid and ugly because you're fat" and saying "you've become fat because you've let yourself become stupid about the world around you."

and let me just state for the record as well... i never said the guy's writing was GOOD... i just said i understood what he was TRYING to say. :lol:

[marlenca]

In my experience the thin people in my life are often not more virtuous than me. In fact often the opposite is true. I know it is not always true but some of us have a much more difficult time staying thin than others. I am sure some people think I don't eat well or that I eat a lot and it is just not true. I have people in my life who do little excercise, eat lots of junk and don't gain a pound. I just don't think it is that simple.

[ysabella]

here... "We’re going to have to get a whole lot less lazy and actually look at what is being done to us. That means taking the time to get better informed, not only about what we’re shoving into our faces, but also about what is being shoved into the minds of our children and down our throats by our politicians, most of whom long since ceased working for us and turned their energies over to serving their corporate masters."
But he says it is "being done to us." The real action verbs are mostly given to those he says are acting on us. The "shoving into our faces" is an exception. Mostly we're "wallowing" or something like that, or riding on motorized carts to cope with our hugeness.

and here... "Shaping up means losing the mental flab that has us tuned in like automatons to American Idol, the latest adventures of Lindsay Lohan and the bimbo brigade, or any of those other Romanesque circuses that make us slack-jawed consumers of whatever swill the media moguls pump into our brains."
Here, the circuses make us slack-jawed consumers.

and here... "Our heritage requires of us, as citizens, that we be more than a nation of overstuffed swine wallowing in the mud of our laziness and indifference. We must reclaim our bodies and our minds from those who’ve snatched them from us. If we can regain our bodies and our minds, maybe we can regain our country, too."
Here, our minds have been snatched from us. Again, it's something being done to us. That's why I don't see it as "tough love." It goes on so much about how things have been perpetrated on us. Political awareness is what he is calling for, because that will cause us to see everything his way, and that will solve everything else.
I can see some glimmer of 'love' in saying that our heritage requires more of us than we're giving, but then he talks about what is perpetrated on us.

i think what the author is giving is "here's what we need to do to succeed, so stop being idiots and DO IT."
He's saying fatness is another symptom of a larger problem of political (and intellectual) apathy. End apathy, fatness will end.

because we've given up. we've become far too preoccupied with reality tv, with politicians who tell us what we want to hear and then go off and do whatever they want to do with no consequences whatsoever, with some unattainable societal "norm" that makes us too busy running from pillar to post to think straight. rather than thinking for ourselves and standing up for what we believe in, it's just so much easier to let someone else take the lead and tell us what to eat, what to wear, what to think. and once you give up, you give your authority figure of choice the power to do whatever he or she wants to do to you.
I don't know anyone like that. Fat, sure, but not apathetic. I know people with ill-informed political opinions, but I don't know anyone who doesn't discuss politics.
Maybe that's why I'm not getting it? I don't think people are really like that. I'm sure some are, I just don't know any of them. And I'm just not quick to label anyone with that.

again, i didn't quite get that from the article. i don't think he's equating "thin" by the standards of the fashion industry with "fit and healthy."

now keep in mind, and this does go for everyone reading the thread, i tend to glean much more from written material than just the surface words. for someone who's adept at reading people, both by what they say and do AND by the vibe they give off, i see beneath the words.
Well, I went and looked up his other articles and his blog. That's part of how I formed my opinion.

[KvonM]

I love that Kvon. Next time I spend paragraphs extravagantly insulting and offending an entire class of people, I will ask you to come explain it to the people who took it wrong. No matter what I say, it's what I mean that matters. I totally get this.
pj, you are far too intelligent and eloquent to require translation from standard american english to standard american idiot. anyone who doesn't get it can just get beaten :).

seriously though, everyone's always going to get annoyed/offended/confused about something somebody wrote in some venue, simply because they can't get past the words used. as soon as i hone my empathy and telepathy skills, i'll let you know when my first "how to read minds" seminar will be held.

P.S. Bring the hammer.
it's my AmEx... never leave home without it :D.

[ysabella]

i do agree that the phrase wasn't the best choice, and i think he missed the confusion when editing.
Well, maybe. But for the record, he is pro-union.
the way i saw it, he's saying obesity of the body is a physiological symptom indicating apathy of the mind.
Yes, I think he's saying the same.
it's the difference between saying "you're stupid and ugly because you're fat" and saying "you've become fat because you've let yourself become stupid about the world around you."
and let me just state for the record as well... i never said the guy's writing was GOOD... i just said i understood what he was TRYING to say. :lol:
I think you're still giving him too much credit. ;)

[rightnow]

I agree. He is actually much more insightful and aware when translated through Kvon. I don't think he actually had nearly as much on his own as her intuition added to that equation.

[HappyLC]

In my experience the thin people in my life are often not more virtuous than me. In fact often the opposite is true. I know it is not always true but some of us have a much more difficult time staying thin than others. I am sure some people think I don't eat well or that I eat a lot and it is just not true. I have people in my life who do little excercise, eat lots of junk and don't gain a pound. I just don't think it is that simple.

You're exactly right...it's not that simple at all. But it's easy for simple minds to make the obese the target of their anger and a symbol of everything they find wrong with the country.

[KvonM]

Here, our minds have been snatched from us. Again, it's something being done to us. That's why I don't see it as "tough love."
i can't remember the exact eleanor roosevelt quote, but it goes along the lines of "nobody can do anything to you that you don't permit." we always have the choice to say "no." we have the choice to stand up for ourselves and determine what works best for us.

He's saying fatness is another symptom of a larger problem of political (and intellectual) apathy. End apathy, fatness will end.
i took a look at some of his other articles too... the guy, at least from my point of view, has enough common sense to realize that just because we sharpen our minds it will not necessarily turn every single person with a BMI over 30 into a supermodel. but we know as well as anyone else that obesity is caused by a number of factors, the biggest one being "i ate junk." there are lots of us on the board who don't suffer from thyroid issues or other diseases, or gained weight because of certain medications. yes, there are circumstances over which we have no control, or where gaining weight means the difference between healthy lives and not-so-healthy lives. but if you're intellectually apathetic about everything else in your life, then it stands to reason you would be just as apathetic about what you eat and show no regard for how it affects your body. wise up enough and take the time to THINK about what you're doing, and maybe we wouldn't see obesity rates climbing as excessively as they have been over the last 25 years.

I don't know anyone like that. Fat, sure, but not apathetic. I know people with ill-informed political opinions, but I don't know anyone who doesn't discuss politics.
Maybe that's why I'm not getting it? I don't think people are really like that. I'm sure some are, I just don't know any of them. And I'm just not quick to label anyone with that.
ok... i see what you're saying. unfortunately, i DO know people like that, i've had to deal with them on a daily basis, and it is frustrating even for someone who doesn't have a severely low tolerance for idiocy the way i do. you feel like just being in the same room with them, your intelligence is being sucked into a black hole, like the speed of your comprehension comes to a screeching crawl, like you can't get anything done at all. i'm more likely to assume that people WILL be that stupid until they prove to me they aren't. i've tried giving them the benefit of the doubt, and more often than not they disappoint me.

[rightnow]

Well honestly, I have met plenty of black hole brain sucking stupid people in my life. But I have no association with them being fat, and in fact I would say it nearly the inverse. Perhaps because of the social exclusion based on weight, most of the seriously heavy people I know are if anything somewhat MORE intelligent, witty, etc. than others. I figure that kinda relates to the archetype of the fat girl who is so funny and "has a good personality." Kind of like a survival/adaptation response, to be better in other ways because of the problems in the appearance category.

So to me, associating sloth, stupidity, etc. with fat is like associating it with being blonde -- a prejudice. Whether racial, cultural, or other, all prejudices are just stereotypes-on-hate and they suck.

[HappyLC]

Maybe I can explain my problem with this article in a different way. Let's substitue "homosexuality" for "obesity". After all, it wasn't too long ago that people made the same unfounded assumptions about gays.

Homosexuality (obesity) is a choice.
Homosexuality (obesity) is a result of weakness.
Homosexuality (obesity) is a result of lax morals.
Homosexuals (the obese) are disgusting.
Homosexuals (the obese) shouldn't be seen.
Homosexuals (the obese) should feel ashamed.
Homosexuals (the obese) could change if they really wanted to.

Now re-read that article, but imagine the target is gays. (Really read it, don't just look at my post and say "okay, I see what you're getting at, but...". Reading it that way is very eye-opening.) Does it still seem like "tough love" to you? Do you still think people are just not getting the sarcasm?

Or is it simply reprehensible?

[ysabella]

i can't remember the exact eleanor roosevelt quote, but it goes along the lines of "nobody can do anything to you that you don't permit." we always have the choice to say "no." we have the choice to stand up for ourselves and determine what works best for us.
He could say that, yes. But he didn't.

i took a look at some of his other articles too... the guy, at least from my point of view, has enough common sense to realize that just because we sharpen our minds it will not necessarily turn every single person with a BMI over 30 into a supermodel. but we know as well as anyone else that obesity is caused by a number of factors, the biggest one being "i ate junk." there are lots of us on the board who don't suffer from thyroid issues or other diseases, or gained weight because of certain medications. yes, there are circumstances over which we have no control, or where gaining weight means the difference between healthy lives and not-so-healthy lives. but if you're intellectually apathetic about everything else in your life, then it stands to reason you would be just as apathetic about what you eat and show no regard for how it affects your body. wise up enough and take the time to THINK about what you're doing, and maybe we wouldn't see obesity rates climbing as excessively as they have been over the last 25 years.
I certainly want people to take an interest in politics, in nutrition, etc. No quarrel there.
But if I insult people, it's because I find something about them to be awful and mockable. Not some lofty goal of kickstarting them into self-love with my beeyotchy remarks.

ok... i see what you're saying. unfortunately, i DO know people like that, i've had to deal with them on a daily basis, and it is frustrating even for someone who doesn't have a severely low tolerance for idiocy the way i do. you feel like just being in the same room with them, your intelligence is being sucked into a black hole, like the speed of your comprehension comes to a screeching crawl, like you can't get anything done at all. i'm more likely to assume that people WILL be that stupid until they prove to me they aren't. i've tried giving them the benefit of the doubt, and more often than not they disappoint me.
I guess I feel that way about article writers/blog authors, then. If they write something I think sucks, I don't give them the benefit of the doubt. They put it out there, after all.

[KvonM]

Maybe I can explain my problem with this article in a different way. Let's substitue "homosexuality" for "obesity". After all, it wasn't too long ago that people made the same unfounded assumptions about gays.
i do honestly see what you're saying, and yes i did go back and re-read with the idea of substituting "homosexual". but i still think where you and i disagree on this is that you're reacting to the method of delivery whereas i'm reacting to the package of information that's being delivered.

again... i'll restate what i said to ysabella in a previous post. i never said the guy's writing was GOOD. the asshole jock football player who happens to be able to draw a semi-funny cartoon strip with cute little ninjas doesn't make him any less of an asshole, you just can't ignore the fact that the ninjas happen to be drawn well, even if they're fairly simple and the jokes are mildly funny.

i think in this case, you're looking at the fact that his writing wasn't as eloquent as it could (or should) have been, and are taking it as purely insulting rather than seeing the message that got lost within his frustration... end the downward spiral of apathy, use common sense and information rather than greed and dogma, and we can bring the mind, body, and spirit to their full potential. if each individual takes care of themselves, then the nation will take care of itself by proxy.

[KvonM]

He could say that, yes. But he didn't.

I certainly want people to take an interest in politics, in nutrition, etc. No quarrel there.
But if I insult people, it's because I find something about them to be awful and mockable. Not some lofty goal of kickstarting them into self-love with my beeyotchy remarks.
i definitely agree, and maybe if the guy had just calmed down a little bit before writing, he wouldn't have come across so badly. his message got lost in the frustration. one of the things i do when i write political commentary is to make sure that everything is sorted out in my mind first, THEN i get the keyboard. and i re-read several times to make sure the point is clear. maybe he just hit "send" a little too quickly.


I guess I feel that way about article writers/blog authors, then. If they write something I think sucks, I don't give them the benefit of the doubt. They put it out there, after all.
heh... amen to that :).

[ysabella]

again... i'll restate what i said to ysabella in a previous post. i never said the guy's writing was GOOD. the asshole jock football player who happens to be able to draw a semi-funny cartoon strip with cute little ninjas doesn't make him any less of an asshole, you just can't ignore the fact that the ninjas happen to be drawn well, even if they're fairly simple and the jokes are mildly funny.
We have no clue if the guy's an asshole. I couldn't tell you. But his article is assholish and it's like you think his drawings are ninjas, and I think they are monkeys.

i think in this case, you're looking at the fact that his writing wasn't as eloquent as it could (or should) have been, and are taking it as purely insulting rather than seeing the message that got lost within his frustration... end the downward spiral of apathy, use common sense and information rather than greed and dogma, and we can bring the mind, body, and spirit to their full potential. if each individual takes care of themselves, then the nation will take care of itself by proxy.
And I think you're reading some guy saying Americans are "fat, dumb, and ugly" and somehow equating it to a subtle tone poem about the potentialities of the human spirit. It's nice of you, but...it doesn't matter how many coats of whitewash or what fancy lights you shine on it, I'm still seeing (and smelling) a turd.

[rightnow]

Actually, his writing was incredibly eloquent.

He simply used that skill for evil instead of good. :lol:

.

[HappyLC]

i think in this case, you're looking at the fact that his writing wasn't as eloquent as it could (or should) have been, and are taking it as purely insulting rather than seeing the message that got lost within his frustration... end the downward spiral of apathy, use common sense and information rather than greed and dogma, and we can bring the mind, body, and spirit to their full potential. if each individual takes care of themselves, then the nation will take care of itself by proxy.

No, I'm not. I'm not looking at anything but the fact that he (and his defenders in this thread) finds it okay to use a group of people to represent "apathy", "greed", and everythig else he feels is wrong with the country. If you can read that piece imagining the use of "homosexuality" in place of "obesity" and not find it completely despicable, then we are on two different planets. It's not just a literary device, it's prejudice. He believes those things about fat people...that's why he thinks it's an appropriate analogy to make.

[KvonM]

It's not just a literary device, it's prejudice. He believes those things about fat people...that's why he thinks it's an appropriate analogy to make. It's also ignorant and hurtful.
*sigh* ok i think we'll have to agree to disagree on this... you're going to read it the way you want, i'm going to read it the way i want, and apparently never the twain shall meet.

he's not making an analogy. he's not saying "you are fat therefore you are stupid." he has not gone through life with the pre-conceived notion that fat people are worthless and lazy. what i get from the article is him saying "americans have allowed themselves to be lulled into stupidity, and one of the side-effects is that americans have become increasingly fatter." his notion is that he remembers a time when obesity wasn't nearly as rampant as it is today... he also remembers a time when it was fairly safe to pick up a hitchhiker (or to be one), a time when you didn't have to triple-lock your doors at night, a time when education meant something and the idea that schools would be allowed to medicate energetic children was horrifying.

the fact that he picked on (and yes, i do recognize that much) fat people is indicative only because it IS still the last -ism that's socially acceptable. do i agree with that? no, but i get why he did it. he's saying we've changed, but while the rest of the world has changed for the better, we've gotten worse. unless you're going to tell me that american society is somehow better today than it was 25 years ago... if that's the case, we really ARE on different planets.

[HappyLC]

Hope you're enjoying life on Mars. :rolleyes:

[rightnow]

but while the rest of the world has changed for the better, we've gotten worse.
Wait a minute.

There is no evidence the rest of the world has changed for the better. What makes you say this? Even the woman who gathers the 5-year statistics on the rise in obesity in the USA (epidemiologist Katherine Flegal) admits that data have not been collected on other countries that would allow us to compare.

This doesn't relate to the original post, just pointing out that the comment noted, I don't see any evidence for that.

[KvonM]

There is no evidence the rest of the world has changed for the better. What makes you say this? Even the woman who gathers the 5-year statistics on the rise in obesity in the USA (epidemiologist Katherine Flegal) admits that data have not been collected on other countries that would allow us to compare.
it wasn't necessarily based on a comparison of other countries to us, it was a statement about other countries advancing in science, politics, economic stability, education level, and basic rights while we stagnate or fall behind. i wasn't trying to say "the standard of living in country X has become better than the standard of living in america", it was more that they're going forward while our government (coughSHRUB-BOYcough) has held us back.

[rightnow]

Maybe. I don't think that can be blamed on the government, or not entirely, which is a major bummer, because if it could, then they could change it. I don't think they can. There is no legislation that could solve much, at this point.

Our culture is hollowing out from the inside, I agree, but I think it's a much bigger picture than legislation or who is in the chair. In fact while people generally blame who is in the big chair, the actual executive orders (some of the most powerful and quiet changes), etc. are completely consistent between the parties, which is kind of frightening (and many of the things that terrify us all about the current one, are supported by EO's made by every president going back like 6 chairs). Maybe that supports your idea of government responsibility, but it certainly removes the partisan nature of it.

To me, the issues we face are not going to be solved except by some other intervening trauma that busts the culture down somewhat to rebegin in many ways. Acts of God/earth changes, long hairy world war, etc. Alas I think we're likely in the early process of a good string of both. Those who survive, depending on how much infrastructure and socio-economic culture is affected, may have the chance to change the direction.

We have it better than the near future probably will. Live in the moment. :D

[bluesmoke]

I think it is amazing that some people can so internalize society's hatred of them that they believe those negative stereotypes about themselves, or their fellow citizens. I can't understand being an apologist for this kind of sensationalist vitriol. But then I don't get people actually paying attention to "Dr" Phil either, maybe it's the same thing. Nyah Levi

[kneebrace]

I think it is amazing that some people can so internalize society's hatred of them that they believe those negative stereotypes about themselves, or their fellow citizens. I can't understand being an apologist for this kind of sensationalist vitriol. But then I don't get people actually paying attention to "Dr" Phil either, maybe it's the same thing. Nyah Levi

What's the connection?

[kaypeeoh]

What's the connection?

Just another 'celeb' as was mentioned 3 or 4 pages ago.

[bluesmoke]

The connection is that the particular "celeb" mentioned has a habit of treating people abusively and has fans who approve.

[southbel]

We constantly talk about how our society is so much worse now than it was X years ago. But is it really? I mean, have you actually thought about that in various perspectives? Sure, in terms of obesity, it's not better. However, as a working woman, I think it's a hell of a lot better than it was 10, 20, 30 years ago. Now, I love technology too. It's what I do for my career and something I enjoy in my personal time. I consider the advent of the computer, the Internet, and the advances in both of those areas incredible advances. They have allowed me to have more information and control in areas of my life, such as my medical care, that I have never had before. I consider this an improvement as well. While I hear a lot of negative comments about the current educational system, my daughter is receiving an excellent public school education and she is learning so much more than I did at her age. She is taking foreign languages in elementary school, computer courses, and I am constantly amazed at the breadth of her knowledge, which is augmented with the aforementioned technology.

Of course, there are problems, but I ask you if there weren't problems in the previous so-called "better" times? Haven't you ever heard the term time makes memories grow fonder? I think this happens often. In addition, politicians, the media, etc. are constantly trying to give us an impression of impending doom so that we will have a state of constant fear so that we will listen to them about what to do. In other words, they want us to make sure we continue to "tune in" for the latest message. I just don't necessarily agree that our society is getting worse.

EDITED TO ADD: While I realize this is a bit off topic, this was a bit in response to the whole bit about we are basically on this downward spiral as a society.

[bluesmoke]

The weeping and wailing about how society is going to the dogs and the young are worthless has been going on for several thousand years of recorded history.
You can find such commentary by the ancient Greeks and Romans about how much more noble and honorable society had been and how bad it is now.
Someone who is a student of history just laughs at such statements made bey the current doom and gloomers. Nyah Levi

[rightnow]

I suppose that's true. Just like we are all examples of our mothers bellowing, I HOPE YOU HAVE A KID JUST LIKE YOU! ;-)

[ysabella]

That's a good point, southbel. It's a form of nostalgia.

A different example: people saying that mom-and-pop stores are "better" than big box stores. Better for whom, exactly? Better for someone who has a positive mental image of warm, homey shops in little towns, and happens to dislike the experience of big, impersonal stores. The big stores are popular because they're cheaper, they offer more options, and you get your errands done with less driving - much better for most people.