Naafa And Fat!so?

[Inspector]

Saw this article on MSN:

http://www.slate.com/id/2128999/?GT1=7407

A growing number [of fat people]are organizing to demand that society transform its bodily ideals, instead of agreeing that they should try to transform their bodies. The best-known of the fat activist groups is the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance (NAAFA), but there are dozens of others, from the Fat Underground, which devotes itself to disrupting Weight Watchers meetings with pro-fat guerrilla theater, to rabble-rousing zines like Fat!So?, "for people who don't apologize for their size."

Frankly, I don't know whether to be angry or just laugh at them. Needless to say, I'm not a fan of movements which glorify and embrace vices and/or disabilities.

There's something I just find so absolutely disgusting about the "fat is beautiful" crowd... To take vice and parade it around as virtue is one of those moral inversions that sets off my sense of justice almost as much as ALTRUISM.

But it's so funny to see them simultaneously throw down the "I don't have a problem/I couldn't help it/it's not a vice; it's a virtue" nonsense.

Contesting the usual origin story about fat—excess calories, individual blame—is high on the activist agenda. The preferred account is that fat is genetic and/or glandular, thus not anyone's fault.

(Cue the James Taggart voice)

I COULDN'T HELP IT!!!

Alternatively, fat is caused by the diet industry: "We're getting fatter because of dieting," as one activist puts it. "The way to fatten an animal is to starve it and then re-feed it. Your metabolism slows down when you're eating less. People on diets are predisposing their body to gain more weight."

?!?

So DIETS are causing them to be fat?

While the diet industry comes under attack, the $900 billion food industry does not. But as Marion Nestle points out in her convincing treatise, Food Politics (2002), the food industry now produces 3,800 calories a day for every person in the United States (2,200 to 2,500 would be adequate). That's a 500 calorie-a-day increase since 1970. And, as Nestle notes, the American weight spike in the late 1970s exactly corresponded with the invention of supersizing in fast-food marketing.

And, inevitably, here come the lawyers. Of course this one isn't news, what with the McDonald's suits, but I just can't belive how they expect anyone to take this argument seriously. "The burger made me do it."

Unfortunately, focusing on the food industry would put the preferred activist fat origin stories into question—unless the one-third of Americans who are now obese all developed glandular or genetic problems simultaneously in the '70s.

Slate, being the too-hip PO-MO pseudo-intellectuals that they are, have to snipe at everyone. In this case, they strike rather to the point: if it's genetic, how can you blame the food industry? You can't have your cake and eat it too, Fatty McSueHappy! (as much as your cake-hole might pine for it! )

[JMeganSnow]

Um, Inspector, this is a bit rude.

I personally am more than just a bit overweight (i.e. 135 pounds or so overweight) and I don't think it's true that the majority of overweight people want to be glorified for having a vice. I've never asked anyone to believe that I was cute . . . only that I have other virtues, and that my weight isn't my most important characteristic.

[Unconquered]

Um, Inspector, this is a bit rude.

More than a bit rude and presumptuous, but he has a habit of that.

From a rational (vs. derisive) perspective, I'm sure there are millions of overweight people who would love to lose the weight, who are in no way claiming that they would rather have it or that it's attractive or healthy. A sensation of hunger, and metabolic issues (including insulin and HGH levels, etc.), are not so easily "willed away", despite the nitwits who never had any such problem (and think that their genes are some proud product of their own will) but who enjoy their second-handed derision of others.

I agree that a "Fat is attractive" campaign is stupid, but that in no way changes what I'm saying.

[Tragdor]

Well I think it is possible for an overweight person to be aesthetically intergrated. I had much unnesessary angest over this when I first decided to become an Objectivist because I have always been attracted to heavier girls.

[Inspector]

I've never asked anyone to believe that I was cute . . . only that I have other virtues

Then why on earth do you think it's directed at you?

From a rational (vs. derisive) perspective, I'm sure there are millions of overweight people who would love to lose the weight, who are in no way claiming that they would rather have it or that it's attractive or healthy.

...and this article, and my commentary on it, have absolutely nothing to do with any of those people. It's an article about fat advocacy groups, fat litigation groups, and fat "we can't help it" groups. I don't mean for this topic to be a commentary on the moral status of being overweight. It's a commentary on the existence of these new political warfare groups.

For my views on the moral status of being overweight, see here: http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=3127

Edited November 8, 2005 by Inspector

[JMeganSnow]

Personally, I think it's in my self-interest to be fat.

Why? Because I have no interest in being thin. In order to lose weight I would have to:

1. Deny myself one of my major pleasures (you know, those reasons that you keep going when you really just want to fall over?), permanently

2. Spend at least an hour of my time every single day in boring, mindless, exhausting, repetitive-stress-inducing physical activity.

What would I get out of it?

1. I might live longer (since I'm generally healthy, this is up for debate)

2. People won't look at me funny.

Since my life to date has been boring drudgery with only brief moments of enjoyment, a few more years don't seem very enticing. And guilt is hardly motivating.

I learned a LONG time ago that in order to realize any long-term goal, it's not enough for you to want whatever it is, you also have to enjoy the process of realizing it. If being thin has to be paid for, not by forgoing one thing I enjoy for another thing I enjoy, but with forgoing something I enjoy for something I hate, I'll pass.

This situation may change if I manage to find a physical activity that I actually enjoy. Wait! I know one! Swimming! Sadly there are no swimming facilities around here. Maybe when I actually manage to move to Hawaii or something I'll finally get around to losing weight. Until then, screw it. Limited time, many goals, etc.

[Inspector]

Er, quite off topic.

for #1: Who says you have to give up anything altogether, much less permanently? Without turning this into a diet-strategy thread, you can reduce portion sizes and not give up any given food. Unless you meant satiety itself...

for #2: Personally, I hate aerobics and never engage in it. http://www.mikementzer.com/aerobic.html

Anyhow, none of that has anything to do with fat litigation, fat "I can't help it" rationalizations, or "fat is beautiful" advocates, which are the subjects of the article and thread.

[Thales]

for #2: Personally, I hate aerobics and never engage in it. http://www.mikementzer.com/aerobic.html

I have read Mentzer on this before. Isn't the basic idea to turn fat into muscle? Muscle is a huge energy consumer, so it takes calories to feed muscle. However, my problems with it are two fold:

1> How do you make your self healthy cardiovascularly if you don't work your heart?

2> I find I feel much better after aerobics than I do after any other kind of exercise.

Incidentally, I do work out with weights once a week and much of what I do is based on Mentzer's program of one set to failure, but I also bike twice a week quite intensely.

[Inspector]

I have read Mentzer on this before. Isn't the basic idea to turn fat into muscle?

Eek! Off topic! And yet I'm replying!

Anyhow, sort of. Not in the sense of literally transmuting it, which is impossible. Rather, in the sense of adding muscle, which then subsequently burns fat.

Here's more: http://www.mikementzer.com/bodyfat.html

1> How do you make your self healthy cardiovascularly if you don't work your heart?

For a quick answer, I think the link covers that. For an in-depth answer, you might want to ask the author

2> I find I feel much better after aerobics than I do after any other kind of exercise.

Great! You are one of those individuals who has the genetic switches for "runner's high." So you have a hobby, which is always good. But that doesn't mean it's a good idea for dieting or health, necessarily. (It could be, if done right, for all I know. That's a question for the experts)

Um, moderators, maybe split this off?

[fatdogs12]

I agree though, I am annoyed with all those groups of people (pro-fat being a good example) that wish than rather deal with something difficult like losing weight, they instead act in order to get people to view it as good. Kinda like rap music with violence.

PS. I lost 40 pounds myself and I exercised maybe 10 or 12 times... Just cut back on bad food, I should also mention that I work at my computer nearly 16 hours a day 6 days a week, so most of my exercise comes from punching keys.

[gnargtharst]

First, generic qualifiers to the effect that I don't consider being overweight to be per se a vice, immoral, etc.

Second, general apologies for any perceived insensitivity and/or thread-off-topic-ing.

And with due respect to JMeganSnow (who offered the personal details for consideration), my comments:

JMeganSnow said:

"In order to lose weight I would have to... [d]eny myself one of my major pleasures (you know, those reasons that you keep going when you really just want to fall over?), permanently..."

As someone who practically worships pizza (I can make my salivary glands tingle by closing my eyes and picturing a slice of jalapeno-pepperoni pizza. Really.) and who enjoys a pretty hefty list of junk food... but as somebody who has lost a lot of weight in the past year... I can say: Not true. To lose weight one need not abstain from all one's favorite foods permanently.

I won't launch into a big diet essay at this point; I only wanted to emphasize that JMegan's point was not true.

JMeganSnow continues: "...pend at least an hour of my time every single day in boring, mindless, exhausting, repetitive-stress-inducing physical activity."

Again, simply not true. Probably even more not true than the first point.

JMS continues: "...What would I get out of it?..."

(At this point I'll point out that this rhetorical question is so full of optional values implications that I wouldn't presume to argue against it. But I will say that likely one's opinion of whether weight loss is desirable is highly skewed by the idea that it requires permanent abstainence of any pleasurable foods and grueling, hour-per-day-every-day exercise.)

"...I might live longer (since I'm generally healthy, this is up for debate)..."

It would be a pretty one-sided debate. 135 lbs overweight is not a trivial health risk.

"...People won't look at me funny."

On the non-importance of this consideration, we agree.

"...Since my life to date has been boring drudgery with only brief moments of enjoyment, a few more years don't seem very enticing. And guilt is hardly motivating."

Agreed. Guilt serves no motivation, except probably to induce more guilt.

But, so as not to let this picture of weight-loss costs and benefits go unchallenged, I will say only that: I feel better after having lost weight. I enjoy many activities more. I have more energy. I do not consider my current dietary habits to be a sacrifice. And I enjoy my jalapeno-pepperoni more, not less, now.

One's health is an optional value -- there are many unhealthy things which are perfectly rational within different people's context. But don't discount the Greek ideal of integrating mind and body.

And, to end on a personal comment -- again, with all due respect to JMS -- if a few more years don't seem very enticing to you, then you're doing something wrong.

[RationalBiker]

I would add a couple of things to the list of potential benefits of weight loss for an overweight person based on my own experience.

1) Improved mental clarity. I suspect there is something about increased oxygen flow to the brain that makes it work better.

2) Improved emotional functioning. I get less frustrated and have a generally more positive outlook on life. I suspect oxygen is at work again, maybe endorphins??

3) More physical energy. I felt more energetic, and I increased my capacity to accomplish daily tasks and life goals, etc.

Now, I don't know that I can support that everyone's results would be the same as mine, though I think most people would benefit in varying degrees in each of those areas.

Obviously I can't determine whether or not those benefits would represent important values to any given person.

[Inspector]

I have no interest in being thin.

Thin, nothing. How about just getting down to the point where you're not courting the reaper? At 135 lbs overweight, you're risking not living past 50. (I missed that the first time around) Optional values, nothing, you can't pursue 'em if you're dead. JMeganSnow, you're got the kind of mind that this world needs right now, rather badly. Don't let that mind be ended too early. (not that need is a claim on anything)

Now, as per my policy, I won't say another word on the matter. I'm not a nag; now that you know my opinion, there's no sense repeating it.

You know the risks and you make your choices.

Egads, how did we get this far off topic?

Edited November 9, 2005 by Inspector

[Styles2112]

I guess, to add to this, I'm a bit overweight (only about 25 pounds or so), but I'm working on eating better (I'm amazed at how much certain foods I used to LOVE now taste horrible), though I'm not amazing at it. Part of the food issue (for me) is cooking better. Using more appropriate oils and styles of cooking. Plus cooking, in general, not only works the body, but also works the mind! Makes the food taste even better.

Now the useless working out thing I can COMPLETELY understand. As a member of a military organization, I'm expected to maintain a certain weight (which I haven't, though I pass tape) and am expected to be able to accomplish certain tasks physically (i.e. 41 push-ups, 52 Sit-ups, and a two mile run in less than 16:37 -that's minutes:seconds ). Now, I hate working out, but I don't mind doing physical things (i.e. swimming, playing football etc.) Unfortunately, none of those things were available in my area, but I'd always wanted to learn Martial arts and found that to be a great way to work out. I now take Tae Kwon Do three times a week and I find that I feel GREAT afterwords. Not only is it a great workout, but it also is WORKING towards something other than exercise. It helps mentally too. Now granted I still struggle with the weight loss and the ability to run two miles, I'm getting much better and feeling much better about myself.

Anyways, sorry for the personal tangent.

On topic- Yeah, I really don't like groups like that either. At some point I think people just need to realize that their choices are their own and stop blaming everyone else for their issues.

[Groovenstein]

In re weight loss, I'm 5'10" and was always skinny. At 15, I started working at McDonald's where I worked for about one and a half years. I got up to about 180. Not huge, but about 35 pounds above my norm. When I was there three or four, and sometimes six, days a week, I ate super-sized value meals and snacks of all kinds. A few months after I stopped working there, I was back down to my usual 145. Of course, I'm not aware of, nor do I presume to be able to evaluate, anyone else's body, eating habits, metabolism, and so on. But my own experience, for what it's worth, was that I lost a chunk of weight not by avoiding fast food entirely, but by not eating it on such a regular basis for a few months, after having eaten it regularly for a year and a half. Two years if you count the six months prior that I worked at Dunkin Donuts (where we got free food).

[JMeganSnow]

I'm aware that there are options for losing weight, but I'd like to point out two things:

1. It is WAY WAY WAY easier for men to lose weight than women. (At least in my family :-P). Taking my mother as a model, what I described is exactly what I'll have to do. It's what she does . . .and not to lose weight, to avoid putting it on. An hour workout every day and something like 1800 calories as a strict vegetarian is a maintenance diet for her. Given, she's older than I am, but still.

2. Most of my problems stem from my current situation and the options that are available to me here . . . I've been looking for a place to work out, swim, ANYTHING . . . and there's nothing within a half hour drive that doesn't cost an arm and a leg. (Except Sinclair community college, and they have the most bizarre hours I have ever seen, all of them while I'm at work.) Lucky for me, I'll be moving out of this roach motel shortly, so I should be able to work on it better in the near future.

Speaking of bizarre handling of eating disorders, I heard an advertisement on the radio this morning where they referred to a recent "epidemic" of anorexia and the fact that it "affects children as young as 9" like it's some kind of bacteria. It was really surreal.

[JMeganSnow]

Geez, Matt, that's insane. I eat fast food once in a blue moon.

Currently, my breakfast is oatmeal and fruit, with some tea. Lunch is a can of soup and some bread. Dinner is whatever I have in the house, which right now means macaroni and cheese with peas and tuna fish. I have to eat the same thing almost every day to save money. I have to eat something hot because it's like 55 degrees in here, the landlord hasn't turned on the heat yet.

[Inspector]

An hour workout every day and something like 1800 calories as a strict vegetarian is a maintenance diet for her.

Did you get the articles on alternatives to time-consuming cardio? Still, that doesn't solve the problem of where to work out... a bowflew, maybe? Probably too expensive. I believe you on the calories thing. I've seen people that need to go to around 1000 or so to dip below maintenance. Your best bet might be to develop muscle to increase your base rate of calorie consumption. I'm sure there has to be a soluton that will work for you.

[fatdogs12]

I'm aware that there are options for losing weight, but I'd like to point out two things:

1. It is WAY WAY WAY easier for men to lose weight than women. (At least in my family :-P). Taking my mother as a model, what I described is exactly what I'll have to do. It's what she does . . .and not to lose weight, to avoid putting it on. An hour workout every day and something like 1800 calories as a strict vegetarian is a maintenance diet for her. Given, she's older than I am, but still.

If there are 3500 calories in a pound (which there are) and you would assume that you burn around 1800-2000 a day why not simply shave off 500 calories a day? At that rate you would lose a pound a week. In a year that is almost 50 pounds. I was too impatient to be on a strict diet that long though so instead I cut my diet down to 800 calories a day and would do that for 2 or 3 weeks at a time. I assume I was burning around 2200 calories a day by default without excercising. Assuming that's true that was a 1400 calorie loss a day. So I would lose a pound every 2 and a half days or almost 3 pound a week.

You already got the energy stored up you just need to make sure you get the things your body needs to funtion. Yes I was hungry for a while but it is possible and 12 pound a month is plenty of motivation to continue.

[JMeganSnow]

GAH! Eight hundred calories a day is below the recommended minimum for an adult, which is like 1000. At a thousand calories a day I've lost weight, and fast . . . the problem is also that I'd sleep 14 hours a day because I had no energy. And I'd still be keeping up this ruinously painful diet for 11 months to get rid of the weight I've got. No THANK you.

I remember reading that Nazi scientists did research in some of the concentration camps on how much food a person requires every day just to survive, and it came to something like 750 calories. A lady speaking on health and dieting mentioned it because a fad supermodel diet at the time was recommending you eat six hundred calories a day. I swear, people are crazy.

It's precisely this sort of advice that makes me say it's not in my self-interest to diet. In a few weeks I may be moving to a more physically-demanding job, which should help. It pays better, too, and I'll be cutting my expenses, so I'll have money to spend on going to a gym or something.

[Inspector]

It's precisely this sort of advice that makes me say it's not in my self-interest to diet.

Yeah, it gets a little extreme if you do it without using exercise. But you can lose weight by just dropping 100 calories below maintenance. It will take longer, but will work just the same.

[Thales]

It's precisely this sort of advice that makes me say it's not in my self-interest to diet. In a few weeks I may be moving to a more physically-demanding job, which should help. It pays better, too, and I'll be cutting my expenses, so I'll have money to spend on going to a gym or something.

Megan, nothing worth while is easy.

There's no question it'll be in your self-interest. Rational Cop's posting points out how.

I'll bet RayK on THE FORUM would have some great advice. His profession is getting people in shape, and I know he employs Mike Mentzer's techniques.

[JMeganSnow]

There's no question it'll be in your self-interest.

In a vacuum, maybe, but I think it's more in my self interest to spend the time and effort required getting my career on track so that I can pay my bills. You have to understand, I work ALL DAY LONG. I get up, go to my regular job, then I come home and work on my writing, read to improve my mind, post here for the same reason, and chat with a few people in the background in order to remember that human beings exist. I have no "free time" that isn't being gainfully employed.

Put a keyboard and a monitor on an exercise bike so I can work while I'm working out and we'll talk.

[Inspector]

I have no "free time" that isn't being gainfully employed.

Can you afford home equipment? If so, it could take a lot less time than you think. As I said, there are alternatives to time-consuming aerobics.

[Felix]

Off-Topic:

Even though I am quite dogmatic about maintaining health (training and good diet) being an objective need of man (I once read that people of this attitude are described as Body-Nazis ), I think Megan is acting very rationally. She puts money first, which is a reasonable choice.

Now she waits (more precisely: she works) till she moves to another place and has another job that pays her more. THEN she may find the time and money to focus on these health issues. If you need your time for work and your money for your rent, then it's perfectly rational NOT to cut off time and money for working out and dieting but instead to focus on improving your situation which is exactly what she does.

She improves her life one area at a time, starting with the one area that makes improvement in all other areas possible: her career, which, once improved, gives her time and money for the rest. Sounds very rational to me. And I'm one of those Body-Nazis.

Sidenote:

I think (from what I read in previous posts ) that Megan is very well capable of defending herself, but this just striked me as interesting, because I learned something valuable myself that I wanted to be available to the rest of you, too. I think that you are dropping the context. Still, your help is both high in quality and certainly well-intended. It's just that even though you are right on principle, the timing is just not right.

On-Topic:

Hmm.. I wonder if these Fat!So?- guys understand how self-contradictory their statements are. Either being fat is beautiful, then: What's the problem? Or being fat is bad and caused by genetics, then they just have bad luck. Or it is bad and caused by the diet industy or the fast-food industry, but this is not valid since they have free will. Gee, this is just weird!

This reminds me of something:

I just helped my little sister with her homework about lactose-intolerance. This made me suggest a club where people fight for more lactose-tolerance, since lactose is being socially suppressed. She just gave me that look again.