Have you ever considered, in your self reflection, that stuff like this is one of the reasons it's so difficult to have a civil discussion with you on some issues? There seems to be a growing number of people who like to throw "dishonest" or "lying" out there to invalidate someone's opinion, and you're certainly part of that group.

I was in no way, shape, or form being dishonest. First of all, in the post I originally replied to, there was no mention of her being "savaged". Here's how I came back into the conversation:

And here's the "snowflakeness" portion of your post I was referring to:

And that's what I was commenting on. What I most definitely was not commenting on was your post from a couple of days ago that had mentioned her being "savaged". It would be rather silly of me to say that was OK when I don't even know what was said about her, or what you mean by that.

And then the other wonderful "debate" technique of yours, where you incorrectly portray what other people are saying. And this one is pretty shitty. I mean, what kind of conversation do you expect to happen when you suggest I am saying "mobs of people can and should attack people"? Seriously??

Ah, this seems to be a new tactic - not just misrepresenting what I've already said, but what I will say in the future.

Sigh.

As for her being "savaged", I did a little searching and can't find much specific. There were a couple of things I came across, though - that a lot of people suggested she was shaming others, and some had gone so far as to say she was a bad mom. I take no issue with the first (depending on how it was said), but I think calling her parenting into question is extremely unfair.

Sadly, that is the downside of online interaction. Even well-founded criticism (her message being a poor one) gets amplified to ridiculous levels, and then there are often some individuals who feel a need to take it to a personal level. In more extreme cases (hopefully this wasn't one of them), some idiots take it to the point of harassment and threats. And no, I don't condone any of that nonsense.

The reason i say dishonest is the only other option would then seem to be dumb and I do not believe you are. Or maybe unauthentic as a less severe form of dishonest might apply.

Instead I believe you are attempting to be on the perceived 'nice' side of the argument and to do so you are using purposely (in that you are smart enough to know) disingenuous arguments.

I don't want to keep dragging this aspect out as we need to just agree to disagree over it as I am not changing on this point which is:

- obesity is a complex and multifaceted problem challenging society and the rate of increase is something that demands very clear focus in ways to address it. Since there is no singular aspect of solution and no one size fits all cure or messaging I believe a multitude of approaches are necessary and justified. Some of those should be directly speaking to people who are dealing with eating disorders ...depression ...motivation, etc.

So the idea that this young lady who finds HER OWN inspiration in taking a 'No Excuses' approach is 'wrong', 'bad', 'not being kind', or any of the much worse things she was accosted with simply for a campaign asking 'What is your excuse!' is wrong. That is WHAT is wrong. People telling her to get f*cked are wrong and they are the ones who society needs to confront and tell them why they are ignorant and wrong, not her.

Her micro focus on HER audience with her messaging to them is as warranted as a psychologist targeting clients with obesity issues due to mental issues. Especially when we know in our personal lives 'motivation' and 'excuses' are almost certainly the #1 reason the vast majority of obese people do cite as most are not dealing with more serious reasons.

Instead her being shouted down and brutally verbally accosted she should have been applauded for that campaign.

Well, hopefully my last post clarified for you that the reason those were your only choices was because you once again made an incorrect assumption about what I was arguing. I'll leave it at that.

If you read the article I linked, you might find that she now disagrees with you on this. I don't believe she'd market herself the same way now, and not because she's afraid of backlash, but because she believes it was wrong.

P.S. if you want to say ****ed, just type it and let the profanity filter do its work. Doing it yourself with one asterisk is viewed as circumventing the profanity filter in some forums.

There's no excuse for anything OTT but that aside I think that in general a range of responses is both to be expected and good. There would be something seriously sick about a society where ~everyone who repsonded, responded the same to anything except the most serious actions (which this is not).

I'm not going to try and get on her head as I know she was savaged on-line as a terrible person and was receiving threats and her kids were threatened.

Most people well intensioned would move whether earnestly or as an easy compromise to the easier POV that does not draw fire. Few want that fight which is exactly WHY the activists make it such a fight.

From the little bit of reading I've done since you posted about her again, I think her perspective has changed somewhat.

https://people.com/health/no-excuses...versial-photo/

I hasn't read about her at all but from your link

So she really is confirming much of what we've been saying. The need to conform to societies ideas of what women should look like was a real problem for her. Plus the original image was retouched.

Yeah, last time I got involved in this thread, that was my focus - that there's a real problem with how women are portrayed in movies, TV, magazines, on social media. Basically, everywhere. Thankfully, I think there has been great improvement in this area, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was still a big issue. Combatting that and the issues it creates for women (especially young women) is what the whole body positive messaging is about. I see no reason that we can't have body positive AND healthy lifestyle messaging.

And of course the Maria Kangs can market themselves how they like, and the public will react how they will react. That's not to say some of the reaction she received was appropriate - the worst I had seen was people saying she was a bad mom (not cool), and Cuepee had mentioned threads, which obviously is completely unacceptable. But I think that is a bigger issue with how social media has enabled a mob mentality. I'm not sure what the solution is, but it's bigger than this thread IMO.

I will just point that, that is a strawman argument generally used by activists as no one is saying 'being like Mike' campaign meant 'achieve what Michael Jordan did or be a failure'.

Insecure people might take it that way and want to tell Michael Jordan and the thousands of aspirational type campaigns and books like it to 'get ****ed', but that is truly because they are insecure.

'Exemptions' 'Valedictorians' and 'A' grades in education hold all the same pitfalls for those who see them as aspirational but then assume not achieving them is somehow a failure and we are not getting rid of them.

No it's not a strawman argument. It's not even about other peoples arguments so it can't possibly a strawman.

The insecurity point is also misguided. The problem of msyogyny is as real as the problem of racism.

you keep railiing against the activists and you have a solid point about the way they behave. But i think that confuses you about the issues.

Oh, please.

If you mean that there is no problem of mysogyny, or that it doesn't apply to this thread then there's a massive disconnect in the conversation.

My view is that it's one the foundational issue. It's not the 'lightly **** off' issue which is a natural reponse to beign told what is best for you by other people who dont seem to know much but it is the main political issue. It's this that the activists are reacting to whether you think they are misguided or not (and whether or not you agree with their tactics).

At least that's how I see it. Disagree by all means but it's just noise if we dont have some udnerstand of where each other are coming from.

I just have one question for you to see how deep our disagreement on this issue runs.

Would you agree that 30+ years ago (in the 80s), the way women were portrayed in movies, on TV, in advertising, etc. set up an unrealistic expectation and unfair pressure on women to look "perfect", and could lead to many mental health issues? I use that time period because I *think* we have made at least some positive strides on this in more recent times, whereas I don't think there was much improvement back in the 80s.

This isn't a question where a "yes" or "no" is going to lead me to some "gotcha". I just genuinely want to understand if we have *any* common ground on this at all.

Maybe their gym closed due to covid ?

Aspirational Goal setting based on visual and real targets of success (Rocket Scientists, Top Musicians, Top Actors, Top Athletes, etc, etc, etc) does work for many.

it works even if they do not achieve the end result of reaching the pinnacle of success portrayed.

I would say the vast, vast majority of society enjoys and wants this type of 'reach' type aspiration goals even if they never get there but the journey in trying to get their means they optimised their own personal performance and self. They got the 'best' out of themselves.

It is the biggest area of 'Self Help', 'Motivational' stuff by far.


And I completely understand that a percent of the population not only has no interest in that stuff but does not like as they choose another path. And another group also suffers from depression and suicides in pursuing it and failing, not being able to reconcile that the end goal is not really the point and it is the journey that is. Meaning you do not fail simply because you do not become the next Michael Jordan or make it the NBA.


What is 100% wrong is the 'get ****ed' individuals who will try to tell others not to try and be that aspirational target or example person. "There message is neither wanted nor desired by ME, and thus it should not be delivered!"

Those people need to get ****ed and realize not everything is or has to be about them. It is perfectly fine and appropriate for that aspirational person to speak to a segment of the audience who appreciates and wants that message and to hear 'what is your excuse' as they know they have been leaning on 'excuses' as to why not eat better or get to the gym.

That there is an attempt in society to create the 'How dare they make me see an aspiration "beach body ready' figure' when I want to feel like my current 'obese body' is beach body ready is gross and dangerous slippery slope when they can use public pressure campaigns to remove the former and replace it with the latter.

Society is allowing itself to be increasingly bullied by inappropriate unjustified rage directed to silence anything that might offend a person who has taken a different path and that is wrong.

I applaud the changes we see in women's imagery in media and movies.

I applaud not every gal having to look like a Barbie doll in 99% of the roles even when 'being hot' was not a necessary character trait.

Yes Hollywood (as an example) will always tend towards the superficial, but when portraying more 'real world' situations I think it is of benefit to see all body styles in a way that reflects society (just as they are adjusting for race and gender in portrayal too).

That too me is a very different thing than 'directing outrage as if sign with a very fit body has no place in today's society as many people do not aspire to that or cannot achieve that' and then replacing it with people who 'are obese by definition and their doctors should be having talks with them about the dangers of their current weight'.

You do not replace 'aspirational campaigns' (which was what the company was speaking to) with what can only be perceived as 'normalizing' instead with message of 'nothing need be done... you are all good', imagery.

Does that mean I would keep those women out of movies or tv shows where appropriate or a campaign based on 'how our product fits all every day women', NO.

I dont know if you didn't read my post or didn't understand it but this isn't a response to it. I agree with nearly your whole post until you start railing against a group who I dont think exist.

Im always going to agree with you on opposing bullying. It's got me into much trouble with the actvist brigade around these parts.

Glad to see we agree on this; I had hoped we would. I also agree that there is sometimes overreaction to things that is amplified exponentially by social media - it sounds like Maria Kang fell victim to this.

I think everyone, but women specifically, have too much pressure on them to look a certain way. The number of teenagers and women in their early 20s getting botox and lip injections is a symptom of this, and it’s sad.

The body positive movement (for lack of a better term) is mostly a good thing, but it can go too far. I think this has more to do with the social media hordes and cancel culture in general since we see similar behavior outside of the body positive movement.

If the movement uses messaging that pretends fat and obese people are generally healthy, then it’s doing a disservice to the people they aim to protect.

However, I don’t think you can comfortably attribute the spike in obesity to the body positive movement. There are just so many other factors that seem to me far more responsible for the spike we’ve seen over the past few decades. Off the top of my head, I believe the microwave and computer have had far more impact on obesity rates than the body positive movement. With some time I’m sure I could come up with several others. It’s a combination of factors, not just one, and body positive messaging would be very low in the list of suspects imo.

Dove has done many 'Real Beauty' campaigns which i think are great.


These women can generally be healthy across this range of sizes.

As I was googling this I saw dozens of their similar campaign ads and while there where a few that had women I think were too obese to be in the ad generally, most were ok.

What I did not see was one single of their ad's with a woman painfully skinny, Not just thin, but the type of skinny that one would look at think she was near anorexia even if she had no such condition.

Society is pretty clear to not celebrate or glorify or normalize that outside the heroin chic phase in fashion and they rightly got savaged for it by the media and people who recognize that imagery is not good to be normalized.

Honest question of why do you think you see the super skinny girls in ad's and imagery any more and yet obesity is becoming quite common? DO you think they are shying away from imagery that is typically hard to call 'healthy' on the skinnier end?

I hope you realise that what you are seeing is the result of the campaignng against unrealistic thin models (and racism)

Still some way to go imo but if we all agree that some go OTT then perhaps we are done.

Excellent post and agreed generally.

I too am dismayed by how many women I know in their 30's (not 20') who seem to think the first sign of a wrinkle requires botox. So many 'frozen faces' and 'duck lips' so young that are going to look disastrous when older. And the mild wrinkles, in no way looked bad on them or were noticed by others.

But is seems impossible to make a 30 something female care about the looks of her 40 & 50 year old and older self.

I certainly realize that.

For much of history there was only one perceived value customer and that was a white male from teen age to old age. Thus almost every gal looked like a barbie doll in most roles. Every sitcom over weight white male got a hot wife. All feeding the male fantasy that he too, no matter how ordinary could have same.

Over correction is pretty common and maybe that is what we are seeing now in this time of hyper sensitivity but we have to be careful that over correction does not create the same problem it sought to fix.

There's a deep conversation to be had imo about the dynamics of attractors and over corrections but we seem to have converged near enough to agreement on this part so maybe another time (or never).

Not my fantasy but I once lived your sitcom (which fortunately for the sake of believability had several bemused witnesses). As someone once pursued very aggresively by the wannabee hot wives I think you may have it wrong.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4360060/Ethiopian-tribesmen-compete-fat-possible.html


Also, this:

https://www.discovermagazine.com/hea...ses-of-obesity

"The population of overweight Pima Indians was found to be more than three times higher than the U.S. national rate." - Keep in mind, my post was a response to the claim that obesity is a modern society thing.