First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Thin Privilege
44366 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Alaska
Offline
Posted 10/12/13

Nmason wrote:

Instead of being mad about other people being thin, how about you stop being fat and make a good change in your life?

Sorry but if you're fat, you're definitely not healthy or fit, even if you order a diet coke with that triple baconator. Genetics aren't an excuse either, and the same goes for thyroid problems. Thyroid problems have been shown to account for 5-10 lbs of body fat and that's it. Being fat or thin is just about calories in vs. calories out.
You can literally lose weight and still get fast food as long as you watch your caloric intake by using something like Myfitnesspal. Of course going to the gym and doing some squats, deadlifts, and a little cardio will help too.

It all comes down to if you want it or not. You can either clime the mountain or complain that someone else is.


I weigh 379.6, my body fat % is only in the range of 27%-30% now.
Lets do some math. 265.72 lbs to 277.108 lbs with 0% body fat.
I can also maintain a 10 mph sprint for a good minute before I have to go back down to 5-7mph run speed for at least 10 minutes before I can do another 10mph run again.
I also lift weights, I have hit the 1,000 club long time ago in high school. Even got as high as 1200 lbs on the leg press, 5 reps. I also bench 320 lbs.

No, I am totally not fit at all, I am just an unhealthy fat guy.
You should educate your self some, there are fat unhealthy people, and there are fat fit people. In my case, almost all my fat is in my gut, some in my ass, and some in my chest, also known as male breasts, everything else is solid. It isn't toned like some people, but it is solid. And due to over 100 lbs of fat stored in a pretty much central location, I am like a guy with one hell of a large beer belly.

47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 10/12/13 , edited 10/13/13

Nmason wrote:

Instead of being mad about other people being thin, how about you stop being fat and make a good change in your life?

Sorry but if you're fat, you're definitely not healthy or fit, even if you order a diet coke with that triple baconator. Genetics aren't an excuse either, and the same goes for thyroid problems. Thyroid problems have been shown to account for 5-10 lbs of body fat and that's it. Being fat or thin is just about calories in vs. calories out.
You can literally lose weight and still get fast food as long as you watch your caloric intake by using something like Myfitnesspal. Of course going to the gym and doing some squats, deadlifts, and a little cardio will help too.

It all comes down to if you want it or not. You can either clime the mountain or complain that someone else is.


So, to be clear, your claim is that even lineman in the US Nation Football League aren't fit? Might I ask what you think the word "fit" means in the context that you're using it? Because no matter how I look at it, I can't see how these professional athletes don't qualify as "fit."

Also if, as you say, being fat is just a matter of calories in vs. calories out, then surely it has nothing to do with being healthy. Might I ask, again, how you're defining "healthy?" Because as far as I understand it, calories are present in all foods, and assuming you're eating a "proper" diet, it seems as though a question of amount would be irrelevant. Calories don't block arteries, calories don't cause diabetes, and calories don't cause heart disease. As far as I know, calories alone don't cause much as far as health is concerned. And if being fat is only a matter of calories, as you've claimed, then clearly being fat doesn't cause health problems.

It might be fair to say that eating 14 double cheeseburgers a day causes fatness, and that eating 14 double cheeseburgers a day causes, say, high cholesterol which causes a stroke. But that doesn't mean that being fat causes strokes. I'm really interested to see how you came to your conclusions. What's your basis for claiming that health is at all dependent on calories, or that having deposits of fat means your body isn't working correctly?
Nmason 
34046 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 10/13/13 , edited 10/13/13


You can claim you have 7% body fat and some nice tight abs at 600 lbs if you feel like it, after all it's the internet, but it won't make me believe you. As far as I'm concerned you're just lying to yourself, or you have no idea what 27% - 30% body fat looks like. I won't say you can't be strong, after all you've basically been dirty bulking your entire life, of course you would have put on some muscle, that's how it works.
And yes you're an unhealthy fat guy, your poor heart has to pump blood to all of that useless meat hanging off you, not to mention the excess strain on your joints. You should see x-rays of fat people, it can be eye opening to see how small their framework is and what their body is made to handle, in comparison to what it actually has to keep running.
I'm not trying to make personal attacks, but being pro-fat is the same as being pro-cigarettes. They're both unhealthy and can be easily stopped with a little willpower, but for some reason our society is full of fat-enablers.

Edit:
Ok so I just saw this picture on your profile http://www.crunchyroll.com/showphoto?id=23626299 and you're nowhere near 27 - 30%. I'm not sure if you're using a scale with BIA (Bioelectrical impedance) or what, to measure your body fat, but you should buy some fat calipers and try again. I'm not trying to be rude, you're just definitely off the mark with that one. I mean NFL linemen have 30 - 35% body fat at sub-300 lbs, and you're saying you have an extra 100 lbs on them with the same body composition? Nope. If you did, then you'd have no reason not to be playing and making millions.
Especially since you said that most of your fat is in your gut and butt, I can tell just from looking at your chest and arms that you're at least 40%, could be higher.


I definitely see your point. Size isn't directly correlated with health, as in skinny people can still be unhealthy just like fat people. But if a fat person actually becomes healthy they'll lose their excess weight, and it wouldn't be a problem anymore.

Calories in/out has to do with body mass. If you eat at a caloric surplus, say 500 calories over maintenance, you'll put on 1 lb of bodyweight per week. Some of it will be muscle and some of it will be fat. Your body adds mass by having extra calories, has no change at maintenance, and will lose mass at a deficit.
What I'm saying is that if you eat all double cheeseburgers, it may not be healthy but you can still lose the fat by staying under on your calories. Yes they may affect cholesterol, but the thin privilege blog is about size, not health. I only mentioned it because fat people claim to be healthy all the time. And yes, all food does contain calories, but healthy foods contain far less, and make it harder to eat a huge surplus. If you ate 3000 kcalories in apples every day, you would still gain fat.

When it comes to health, if you're fat off of apples and broccoli and the sort, which is already highly improbable, you likely wouldn't have the same problems as your average fat dude. However, you would be putting excess strain on your joints, something you'll definitely feel in the long-term if you don't short-term, and making your heart pump blood through lots of extra dead weight. Laying down you put all that weight on your lungs and it can be harder to breath. Also visceral fat can increase and become a problem, and damage your liver and other organs.

Oh, and about the linemen, they're big and strong, but I still wouldn't call them 'fit'. Fitness is defined as being the condition of being physically fit and healthy. Many college linemen suffer severe health problems after their graduation. The vast majority of them try to lose the weight after they stop playing, they're literally only heavy so that they're hard to move. The same goes for NFL linemen too. It just isn't healthy for your body to be that big.
Here's a link to an article talking about that specifically: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/29/sports/football/29weight.html?pagewanted=all
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 10/13/13 , edited 10/13/13

Nmason wrote:



I definitely see your point. Size isn't directly correlated with health, as in skinny people can still be unhealthy just like fat people. But if a fat person actually becomes healthy they'll lose their excess weight, and it wouldn't be a problem anymore.

Calories in/out has to do with body mass. If you eat at a caloric surplus, say 500 calories over maintenance, you'll put on 1 lb of bodyweight per week. Some of it will be muscle and some of it will be fat. Your body adds mass by having extra calories, has no change at maintenance, and will lose mass at a deficit.
What I'm saying is that if you eat all double cheeseburgers, it may not be healthy but you can still lose the fat by staying under on your calories. Yes they may affect cholesterol, but the thin privilege blog is about size, not health. I only mentioned it because fat people claim to be healthy all the time. And yes, all food does contain calories, but healthy foods contain far less, and make it harder to eat a huge surplus. If you ate 3000 kcalories in apples every day, you would still gain fat.


First, I'll just say that I agree with you about the "thin privilege" blog -- it's utter bullshit. However, your claim was "If you're fat, then you're definitely not healthy or fit." I'm not arguing whether calories affects weight, I'm arguing whether weight is unhealthy. Since the first part of that only tells us why calories affects weight, then it's irrelevant. I have no significant problems with anything you've said above, but none of it implies that a fat person must necessarily be unhealthy or unfit. Some people use this to excuse themselves from being active, which is retarded, but it still seems true for at least some.


When it comes to health, if you're fat off of apples and broccoli and the sort, which is already highly improbable, you likely wouldn't have the same problems as your average fat dude. However, you would be putting excess strain on your joints, something you'll definitely feel in the long-term if you don't short-term, and making your heart pump blood through lots of extra dead weight. Laying down you put all that weight on your lungs and it can be harder to breath. Also visceral fat can increase and become a problem, and damage your liver and other organs.


This, on the other hand, is a pretty good point. I agree completely.



Oh, and about the linemen, they're big and strong, but I still wouldn't call them 'fit'. Fitness is defined as being the condition of being physically fit and healthy. Many college linemen suffer severe health problems after their graduation. The vast majority of them try to lose the weight after they stop playing, they're literally only heavy so that they're hard to move. The same goes for NFL linemen too. It just isn't healthy for your body to be that big.


Fair enough. If you define fitness as "physically fit" and "healthy," then of course you're right. But more than lineman in football, many of the health problems that they suffer from are rather common for most athletes. Any sport will put a lot of strain on your body, and even tennis and soccer players have long-term health problems, especially in the joint department. Since we've included health in the definition for fitness, we actually end up with the rather interesting result that professional athletes are less likely to be fit than the average gym-goer. Perhaps you'd agree with this, but being that most people think of athletes as representative of fitness, I thought it was strange to define it that way.

Disregarding things like joint problems, which I now agree are an almost direct result of weight, many lineman can run longer and even sometimes faster than what the average person might call "fit." As far as things like their cardiovascular strength is concerned, they seem to often be on par, if not in excess of most standards for fitness. While it is true that many (probably most, actually) don't lose the weight after they're done, you've also stated that it is completely possible to lose the weight, since it's only a matter of taking in less calories, or putting more out. Assuming that they lose the weight after they are done, and don't have any long-lasting injuries while playing, it's entirely possible that they may exceed regular standards for fitness while playing, and exceed it while not playing. Thus, there's never a time that they might be considered unfit. I'd argue that there are some people that fit this profile, although I'd also agree that it's incredibly unlikely. Edit: The article you posted also supports this. I'm not arguing that fat people (and lineman) aren't more likely to have health problems. However, the article states that it is not a straight causal connection. While playing, lineman do not have a greater prevalence heart disease risk factors compared to the general population. While most have problems after they're out, for the reasons you've stated, there are also many that continue to be healthy after they're retired.

However, I now agree with you that sheer weight over time will directly cause some problems particularly with joints and such. I know I'm 6'4'' and 190 lbs, and I'm already feeling it in my joints a bit. You might be on to something with the point on the joint problems, but all things considered -- everyone will have those problems, since it's a normal part of getting older. Eventually, the weight of even the most health conscious people will wear on weakened bones. Natural deterioration occurs in everyone, and while I'll now agree that putting on excess weight will speed the deterioration, I'd argue that things beside sheer weight are more affective of the results.
Nmason 
34046 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 10/13/13 , edited 10/13/13


First off, sorry for the long spoiler, I'm not entirely certain on how to quote specific sections.

I wouldn't say that the health problems linemen encounter are common honestly, I linked an article that isn't very long and goes into a bit more detail about that. Basically it says that even though they're big, strong, and fast, they're still carrying around extra weight in the form of body fat (a good bit of it), and this makes them unhealthy regardless of explosive speed and power. The weight can be lost, although many of them have trouble losing it, but this doesn't mean if hasn't already negatively affected them, and many of these problems can be reduced by losing the weight but not reversed. Read the article, it's a pretty decent read, and decide if you would call them unfit at any point.
Many athletes do have joint issues, I did marching band and tennis all throughout high school, and I know it affected my joints, especially tennis. I wouldn't argue that point against them fitness-wise, because it isn't due to extra weight, it just happens because you're constantly using your elbow joint, and that will wear on it eventually.
I would agree with your point that athletes can be thought of as representatives of fitness in general, but definitely not all athletes. Football has lots of overweight players and their unhealthy eating habits are becoming a concern. But I wouldn't say a joint problem from tennis is a health issue, just an injury from overuse of the joint, whereas there are a multitude of problems stemming from linemen's consumption of 5000 - 8000 calories a day, and keeping unnecessary fat on.

Edit: Saw that you read the article I linked. The article supports the fact that extra weight in the form of body fat is unhealthy. So it's not simply the measure of weight in lbs that I would say is unhealthy, it's the body fat percentage, or the amount of pointless excess that is carried around that is unhealthy. But then again that's why they're called fat, if they were super heavy but had low body fat we'd be calling them buff.
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 10/13/13 , edited 10/13/13

Nmason wrote:



First off, sorry for the long spoiler, I'm not entirely certain on how to quote specific sections.

I wouldn't say that the health problems linemen encounter are common honestly, I linked an article that isn't very long and goes into a bit more detail about that. Basically it says that even though they're big, strong, and fast, they're still carrying around extra weight in the form of body fat (a good bit of it), and this makes them unhealthy regardless of explosive speed and power. The weight can be lost, although many of them have trouble losing it, but this doesn't mean if hasn't already negatively affected them, and many of these problems can be reduced by losing the weight but not reversed. Read the article, it's a pretty decent read, and decide if you would call them unfit at any point.
Many athletes do have joint issues, I did marching band and tennis all throughout high school, and I know it affected my joints, especially tennis. I wouldn't argue that point against them fitness-wise, because it isn't due to extra weight, it just happens because you're constantly using your elbow joint, and that will wear on it eventually.
I would agree with your point that athletes can be thought of as representatives of fitness in general, but definitely not all athletes. Football has lots of overweight players and their unhealthy eating habits are becoming a concern. But I wouldn't say a joint problem from tennis is a health issue, just an injury from overuse of the joint, whereas there are a multitude of problems stemming from linemen's consumption of 5000 - 8000 calories a day, and keeping unnecessary fat on.



Yeah, I read it right after I posted, and then just put in an edit. I think our main disagreement here is on correlation vs. causation. While I agree completely that if you're fat, the odds are very much against you, and even in the case of the lineman, most end up unhealthy. However, the article you posted also said that most lineman have no more risk for heart disease, diabetes, or the like than the general population -- until they retire. It is true that most have a tough time after after they retire, and the risk for all those things shoot up. There are also cases in which they stay healthy after retirement. It really does seem to be a matter of whether they maintain that weight after they've retired. And while there are many more examples of bad cases then good cases, the article does say that many lineman continue to stay healthy after they've retired. It even gives examples. I'll repeat -- I do think that if fat, you're probably unhealthy. However, I'm also pretty convinced that some are healthy.
Posted 10/13/13 , edited 10/13/13

puellapeanut wrote:

If you're not one thing, you're another. To people, you can't win either way, in any way.


Leave out all the rest and enjoy yourself

Nmason 
34046 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 10/13/13



Yeah, I read it right after I posted, and then just put in an edit. I think our main disagreement here is on correlation vs. causation. While I agree completely that if you're fat, the odds are very much against you, and even in the case of the lineman, most end up unhealthy. However, the article you posted also said that most lineman have no more risk for heart disease, diabetes, or the like than the general population -- until they retire. It is true that most have a tough time after after they retire, and the risk for all those things shoot up. There are also cases in which they stay healthy after retirement. It really is a matter of whether they maintain that weight after they've retired. And while there are many more examples of bad cases then good cases, the article does say that many lineman continue to stay healthy after they've retired. It even gives examples. I'll repeat -- I do think that if fat, you're probably unhealthy. However, I'm also pretty convinced that some are healthy.


I understand where you're coming from, and respect your argument, but yeah that's where we start to disagree. I mean the amount of extra fat they carry is just by its nature hard on their bodies, and can cause things like liver problems or joint issues, etc, which is why I would say it's unhealthy. Their cardiovascular health is actually really good for their size though, and I think that's what offsets their risk for heart disease and the like.
Those select few aside, it sounds like we can agree that your regular fat person that doesn't run and tackle things for a living is going to be unhealthy, and if they're running a thin-shaming pro-fat blog, they're basically guaranteed to be unhealthy. I mean I haven't met an obese person I would consider healthy, at least not yet.
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 10/13/13

Nmason wrote:




Yeah, I read it right after I posted, and then just put in an edit. I think our main disagreement here is on correlation vs. causation. While I agree completely that if you're fat, the odds are very much against you, and even in the case of the lineman, most end up unhealthy. However, the article you posted also said that most lineman have no more risk for heart disease, diabetes, or the like than the general population -- until they retire. It is true that most have a tough time after after they retire, and the risk for all those things shoot up. There are also cases in which they stay healthy after retirement. It really is a matter of whether they maintain that weight after they've retired. And while there are many more examples of bad cases then good cases, the article does say that many lineman continue to stay healthy after they've retired. It even gives examples. I'll repeat -- I do think that if fat, you're probably unhealthy. However, I'm also pretty convinced that some are healthy.


Those select few aside, it sounds like we can agree that your regular fat person that doesn't run and tackle things for a living is going to be unhealthy, and if they're running a thin-shaming pro-fat blog, they're basically guaranteed to be unhealthy. I mean I haven't met an obese person I would consider healthy, at least not yet.


Agreed.

Part of our disagreement could also be that I just straight up don't know enough to be able to talk about it. It's really regardless to me anyway, since all I can really do is concentrate on doing what I want. I can make judgments on whether a fat guy is is cool to hang out with, smart, or funny, but perhaps whether he's healthy is not something I can have an opinion on, or really, even care about. If they're healthy, it doesn't really affect me, and if they're not, then it doesn't really affect me (unless the blog makes its way into popular culture).
15456 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 10/13/13 , edited 10/13/13
"Privilege" is a word being thrown around now so often that soon it's going to lose meaning altogether. People use it when there's a group of other people who they feel had it slightly easier in life than they did, so they want to make this difference known by yelling the word to the heavens instead of just... getting over it. All of this insistence that someone is better off in society purely because of physical attributes, many of which the people themselves can't help (skin colour, height, gender) creates more animosity, breeds more contempt and actually causes more discrimination than it solves.

I wish the whole thing would just piss off.
Posted 10/13/13

theYchromosome wrote:

You think fat people have it bad? People that are known morons have it way worse. Just try to be respected at work after everyone learns you're clueless. It doesn't matter how nice you look, how hard you work, or how friendly you are -- once you've established that you can't complete simple tasks, and have trouble putting together a discernible sentence, everyone treats you like a child (except for the other fools you work with... Or, I guess, "proficiency-challenged" might be a better term).

Being incompetent is much harder than being fat, and in my experience, it seems to occur in a larger number of people. Plus, if you're incompetent, everyone assumes you're just too lazy to think. At least fat people have things like thyroid problems and genetics -- everyone just assumes that idiots have nobody to blame but themselves. But that's not true! I've friends that descend from long lines of pinheads -- they're genetically predisposed for ineptitude! I know this guy at work. His manager is always on his case, telling him things like "you need to show up on time!" and "make sure you log in the numbers correctly!" Once, he was told multiple times to fill out a form. Yet I was only told once. What, so just because I do the job that I'm paid to do means I get a free pass? And he gets chewed out? Does that sound fair to you? Competent Privilege is not being told to do something seven times, just because you've already done it.


The recruitment department must be incompetent too and this guy, you should talk to him, I've been surprised many times by how people who don't excel at one thing do way better at another. Another thing, some people can not do simple tasks well but can do extremely hard tasks like a whiz. Is there only a one way of doing those tasks? Frankly, I would be eying the manager's job.
Nmason 
34046 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 10/13/13



Agreed.

Part of our disagreement could also be that I just straight up don't know enough to be able to talk about it. It's really regardless to me anyway, since all I can really do is concentrate on doing what I want. I can make judgments on whether a fat guy is is cool to hang out with, smart, or funny, but perhaps whether he's healthy is not something I can have an opinion on, or really, even care about. If they're healthy, it doesn't really affect me, and if they're not, then it doesn't really affect me (unless the blog makes its way into popular culture).


Yeah, I have no issue with people simply based on weight and health. I was friends with a guy through high school that was easily 350 lbs and a really nice guy.
Just as a general disclaimer, I have absolutely no problem with people based solely on their weight. I just dislike when people make unrealistic claims about being healthy at ridiculous weights. In a similar manner, it bugs me when people who take steroids to improve their physique lie about being natural. I don't have an issue if you take steroids, or if you're obese. To each their own, just fess up about it in my opinion. I guess it's just the whole false advertising, and the fact that people actually end up believing them, that bugs me. I hate thinking that one fat person is spreading the word about how healthy fat people actually are, and there's a guy out there setting unrealistic fitness goals to people who don't want to use steroids. I guess they're not that related, just both things that bug me.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 10/13/13
While I do feel for the people being bullied, and while I do agree that people should stop bullying, as I've seen in a couple of posts here, it also seems that many people have this attitude that being fat should not be criticized at all. Which I don't agree with.

Like it or not, being fat is not healthy. It's just not. And we need to encourage people to lose weigh.
And part of that encouragement can be more inconveniences.
I've was fat pretty much all my teenage years. I was severely depressed with absolutely no self-esteem, and I thought I couldn't change it. That it had to be something medical. But then, when I was 18, I started excercising and eating less. And guess what -- it helped. I lost weight.
I think that in the case of many people who think they can't help being fat, it's just a matter of mindset.

Of course, I could be wrong, but I have a hard time believing that someone will stay fat even if they excercise and/or eat very little.
Posted 10/13/13 , edited 10/13/13

Syndicaidramon wrote:

we need to encourage people to lose weigh.
And part of that encouragement can be more inconveniences.

Creating more inconveniences is an extremely capitalistic approach. You need to realize that it's psychological, and that making it worse won't make it better (Pardon, it's not just you who needs to realize this; everyone needs to realize this). It's like kicking someone while they're down in order to make them get up. It's a method that belongs in the seventeenth century, when we still thought that allowing tutors to beat our children in school was appropriate- in fact, necessary- to achieve discipline. But the truth is, that it doesn't solve anything. It is counter-productive.

Think about it this way: When someone has a cold, what do you do to make it better? Do you chase them out naked into a blizzard? Do you deprive them of medication? This type of mindset, that if you help them get back on their feet they'll become reliant on help, thus become weak, is absolutely false reasoning when you're dealing with illnesses, whether it's in body or in mind.
313 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / F / Florida
Offline
Posted 10/13/13
AGH! That tumblr seriously pisses me off! What is their problem? "I hate being discriminated against and shamed for how my body looks, so I'm going to do exactly that to a group of people whose only thing in common is their body weight!" That's just disgusting. This is hypocrisy at its finest, people. We rant and rave all the time about how horrible it is that people are made to feel ashamed of being overweight, but we just assume that it's okay to make thin people feel ashamed of their weight? Like thin people don't have feelings or something?

Aside from that, it just makes the people who made the tumblr look pathetic, like they're just blaming other people for their problems. Yeah, guys, it's NEVER you're fault that you're fat. Just blame it on genetics or some shit that you don't even understand so that you don't have to do anything about it. You know what I did when I was so underweight that it was a danger to my health? I didn't blame my problems on society or genetics, I did everything I could to make myself healthy again. When I was young, the doctor told my mother that I was "failing to thrive." When I was in elementary school, people called me "stick figure" and laughed at how freakishly bony I was. Does that sound like "thin privilege" to you? Do you honestly think that making webpages like this doesn't make you look like a bunch of whiny assholes? It must feel nice being able to sit around whining about your problems and blaming them on literally everyone else besides you.

By the way, your genes can't make you fat. Your genes can only cause behaviors that are more likely to make you at risk for being overweight. So no, genes aren't an excuse for being overweight.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.